Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.31 seconds)
State Bank Of India vs Balbir Kumar on 24 May, 2012 cites

Senior Superintendent Of Post Office vs Ashok Kumar Huf C/O M/S Narinder ... on 16 December, 2009

7. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that as per the circular letter, copy of which is Ex.R2, the PPF account of HUF would be void with effect from May 13, 2005 and, therefore, no interest can be paid thereon. It was in view of this circular letter that the OP-appellants withheld the amount of Rs.1,20,487.62 which was the interest on the said amount accruing after the said date. Such a question arose in case "Senior Superintendent of Post Office and another v. Ashok Kumar HUF" I (2011) CPJ 41 in which on maturity, the complainant was not paid the full amount with interest and the learned District Forum directed the OP- appellants to pay the balance amount. The State Commission directed that the complainant was entitled to 6% interest. The Hon'ble National Commission upheld the order on the ground that since the deposits continued with the OP, it was, therefore, liable to pay interest. The award of interest @ 6% p.a. on the deposited amount after 31.12.2005 was held to be most equitable and rationale and the order passed by the State Commission was upheld.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 0 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

The Senior Postmaster,Head Post ... vs 1. Mrs. G. Nalinitiruvarur, Tiruvarur ... on 13 August, 2010

In another case "Senior Postmaster, Head Post Office, Thanjavur v. G.Nalini & another", IV (2010) CPJ 201, the irregular account was opened in the joint name and it was alleged that they were not entitled to interest as per First Appeal No.114 of 2008 4 Rule 25 of the PPF. When the complaint was filed, the learned District Forum directed the OP to pay interest @ 12% per annum holding that Rule 6 enables the OP to pay interest even in case of irregular account. The Hon'ble Tamil Nadu Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai held that since the appellants had enjoyed the benefits of the amounts deposited by the complainant, it was bound to pay interest under equity also. The OPs were directed to pay interest @ 9.5% per annum.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 2 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1