Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the usurious loans act 1918 Court: mumbai Page 1 of about 27 results (0.015 seconds)

Feb 01 1991 (HC)

Gulabchand Laxmichand Bhutada Vs. Central Bank of India and Another

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1991)93BOMLR996; 1992(1)MhLj68

..... with the circulars issued by the reserve bank of india, still it was open to the courts to reopen such transactions in exercise of power under the provisions of the usurious loans act, 1918, and give relief by reducing the rate of interest in appropriate cases on the ground that it was unreasonable and harsh. in order to overcome this difficulty, parliament while enacting ..... the earlier decision of the high court in krishna reddy v. canara bank, : air1985kant228 , that the courts in view of the mandate of section 21a cannot exercise jurisdiction under the usurious loans act, 1918, or any other law relating to indebtedness for the purpose of giving relief to any party. it must be said that in this case the question whether section 21a is ..... in respect of such transaction is excessive.' 13. on the face of it, it is clear that by the said section, parliament intended that notwithstanding the provisions contained in the usurious loans act, 1918, or any other law relating to indebtedness in force in any state, courts will not be entitled to reopen any transaction between a banking company and its debtor on the ..... august 20, 1981, defendant no. 1 has filed the present second appeal. 8. shri gilda, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, urged that although the provisions of the usurious loans act, 1918, are attracted in the present case, both the courts below failed to apply those provisions and reduce the rate of interest on the ground that it was excessive. he contended .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 1992 (HC)

Bank of Baroda Vs. Perchem Industries and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1992(3)BomCR387; (1992)94BOMLR589

..... question, section 21-a is reproduced below :'21-a. rate of interest charged by banking companies not to be subject to scrutiny by court:---notwithstanding anything contained in the usurious loans act, 1918, (10 of 1918), or any other law relating to indebtedness in force in any state, a transaction between a banking company and its debtor shall not be reopened by any court on ..... the transactions in the two suits, the respondents will not be entitled to call upon the court to exercise power under sub-section 1(a) of section 3 of the usurious loans act, 1918.13. the respondents while contending that section 21-a is prospective in its application relied upon the decision in muthian and another v. syndicate bank, pollachi, : air1987mad248 . it is ..... still operative in vidarbha area. it was also the defence of the respondents that the period of rests being less than six months, presumption of interest being excessive under the usurious loans act 1918 can be drawn and, therefore, the accounts should be ordered to be reopened under section 3 thereof. we are not concerned with other defences since not under challenge in these ..... that the interest charged by the banking companies in respect of such transaction is excessive.11. it cannot be denied that the provisions of usurious loans act, 1918 giving power to the courts to deal with certain cases of usurious loans are still on the statute book. it appears that since the subject of money lending was in the state list, even under the government .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 03 1991 (HC)

Syndicate Bank and Another Vs. Kailashchandra and Another

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1993]76CompCas392(Bom)

..... excessive.' 6. the amended section 21a is brought on the statute book on february 15, 1981. a mere perusal of this amended section 21a shows that the provisions of the usurious loans act, 1918, are no more applicable and, therefore, the court cannot reopen the accounts. 7. the present appeal is admitted on october 14, 1983, and, during the pendency of this appeal, section ..... amended reads as under : '21a. rate of interest charged by banking companies not to be subject to scrutiny by courts. - notwithstanding anything contained in the usurious loans act, 1918 (10 of 1918), or any other law relating to indebtedness in force in any state, a transaction between a banking company and its debtor shall not be reopened by any court on the ..... yes, its effect', and answered the issue in the affirmative. the learned trial court held that the first proviso to section 3(2)(a) of the usurious loans act, 1918, is applicable to advance of money by the bank and ordered that the accounts between the parties be reopened from the beginning. 3. the short question to be decided in ..... bank on the ground of excessive charging of interest under the provisions of the usurious loans act, 1918. 11. shri deo, learned counsel for the respondents, has relied on the provisions of section 2 of the banking regulation act, 1949, and submitted that the provisions of the usurious loans act are not barred. section 2 of the banking act can be usefully extracted as under : 'the provisions of this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 24 2009 (HC)

Jayantilal D. Doshi (Since Deceased Through His Heirs Smt. Indira Jaya ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2009(111)BomLR4172

..... , any challenge with this regard, therefore, now is unsustainable.15. the defendant's case that the suit is barred under section 10 of the bombay money lenders act and based upon the transaction under usurious loans act, 1918, are also unacceptable being commercial transaction between the commercial minded person. the reliance of the defendant based upon the judgments in view of above admitted documents, are ..... of the written statement?5. what relief and order?7. issue no. 1:the defendant is a registered broker and proprietor of m/s. hiralal liladher. the plaintiff advanced various loan amount to the firm for vyaj badla transaction. there is no denial to the 'vyaj badla' account. when the defendant closed the transaction, balance of rs. 2,17,740/was ..... of m/s. hiralal liladhar.2. the plaintiff out of his saving lent and advanced to the defendant the amount as per the claims, as and by way of business loan. the defendant agreed to pay the interest at the varied rates from time to time. the defendant, as agreed, made part payment of interest and on closing of the financial ..... that it was not agreed the rate of interest and or not permitted to charge compound interest. therefore, the submission based upon section 34 of civil procedure code (cpc) and above two acts as referred, is also need to be rejected. the judgments so cited by the parties in view of above facts itself are distinct and distinguishable.14. the defendant himself agreed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 1970 (HC)

K.i. Suratwala and Co. Vs. Mahmud Bidi Works Sholapur and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1972Bom238; (1972)74BOMLR131; ILR1972Bom317; 1972MhLJ340

..... . in our opinion, this judgment is totally irrelevant for the purposes of our case.18.mr. gumaste also invited our attention to the definition of loan in section 2(2) of the usurious loans act, 1918 (act 10 of 1918) which provides that a 'loan' means a loan whether of money or in kind and includes any transaction which is, in the opinion of the court in substance a ..... loan. in this case the loan is of money. the usurious loans act 1918 gives a wider definition and provides that if a transaction is in the opinion of the court in ..... substance a loan, it is a loan. in this case we have already held that in our opinion the transaction was ..... in substance a loan and therefore the said transaction would be a loan under the usurious loans act, 1918. we are however .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 20 1935 (PC)

Homeshwar Singh Vs. Kameshwar Singh

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1935)37BOMLR800

..... of both the lower courts, that the charge of compound interest at twelve per cent, was not excessive or otherwise open to challenge under the usurious loans act, 1918.12. in their lordships' opinion it is not open to the appellants to go behind the concurrent findings in the case, and the appeal ..... lower courts have also found that the charge of twelve per cent, compound interest is not excessive nor the transaction unfair within the meaning of the usurious loans act, 1918.9. mr. degruyther for the appellants has contended that there are not concurrent findings of fact which cannot be questioned on an appeal to his ..... that influence to get them to consent to unfair terms which they proceeded to set out. they also claimed a reduction of interest under the usurious loans act, 1918, on the ground that the interest was excessive or that as between the parties the transaction was unfair.3. both the courts below found that ..... ' case was false. as early as august 1922 they had applied to the plaintiff to whom they were already heavily indebted for a further loan. when their properties were sold in execution of a decree obtained by other creditors in january 1923, and they had thirty days ending on ..... for the deposit in court of the purchase money and the compensation money payable to the auction-purchasers, the plaintiff refused to give them a loan except on the terms that all the defendants should execute a mortgage bond bearing compound interest at twelve per cent, and including, not only .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 22 1919 (PC)

Kering Rupchand and Co. Vs. A.S.B. Bayley

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1919)21BOMLR1126; 58Ind.Cas.433

..... for six installments from january to june 1919.3. the defendant does not appear but, though the suit is ex parte, the court has, under section 3 (1) of the usurious loans act, 1918, jurisdiction to consider the merits of the transactions.4. the bond professes to charge interest at 2 per cent. per mensem but the scheme of the bond is that the ..... installments. as regards the six installments in suit there is no occasion to disturb the provision for repayment of the principal by installments of rs.150 per mensem.8. the loan was made on personal security and i may take it that the rate of 2 per cent. per mensem was reasonable in view of the risk incurred. but the progressive ..... at the end of the 33rd and 34th months work out to the preposterous rates of 50 per cent. per mensem and 200 per cent. per mensem.5. under the act, the court may reopen the transaction and relieve the debtor of all liability in respect of excessive interest, if two conditions are fulfilled. these are that the court has reason ..... pratt, j.1. in this suit, the plaintiff', a poona money lender, seeks to recover on a bond executed by the defendant on the 7th of september 1918. the consideration of the bond is a cash advance of rs. 5000 and the obligor agrees to repay rs. 8400, i. e., rs. 5000 principal and rs. 3400 interest. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 06 2002 (HC)

Roshan Dinshaw Karai and anr. Vs. Mrs. Sangita L. Mankani and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR2003Bom105; 2003(1)ALLMR948; 2003(2)BomCR607; 2003(1)MhLj594

..... the contractual rates up tothe date of redemption in all circumstances even if there is no question ofthe rate being penal, excessive or substantially unfair within the meaningof the usurious loans act, 1918. in view of the principle laid down bythe federal court in this decision we are of opinion that in thecircumstances of the present case the respondent should be grantedinterest ..... the reference was answered as under :--'(1) subject to a binding stipulation contained in a voluntary contract between the parties and/or an established practice or usuage interest on loans and advances may be charged on periodical rests and also capitalised on remaining unpaid. the principal sum actually advanced coupled with the interest on periodical rests so capitalised is capable ..... interest, has acquired the colour of the principal and having stood amalgamated in the principal sum, would be so adjudged. the principal sum adjudged would be the sum actually loaned plus the amount of interest on periodical rests which according to the contract between the parties or the established banking practice has stood capitalised. interest pendente lite and future ..... . the plaintiffs have filed the present suit. it is the case of the plaintiffs that original defendant no. 1 since expired and defendant no. 2 approached them for a loan which the plaintiffs agreed to advance on the condition that as a security, the defendants should create a mortgage. accordingly, the plaintiffs advanced a sum of rs. 80,000/- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 28 1939 (PC)

Lachhmeshwar Sahai Vs. Moti Rani Kunwar

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1939)41BOMLR1068

..... , and they considered that the rate of interest (twenty-four per cent. per annum) stipulated by the mortgage deeds was excessive and within the provisions of section 3 of the usurious loans act, 1918. their lordships see no reason to interfere with the high court's direction as to interest. the sums of rs. 1,292 and rs. 448, amounting to rs. 1,740 ..... in her husband's share after his death; whether, the condition prohibiting her from making a mortgage or other transfer is bad under section 10 of the transfer of property act, 1882 ; or whether she took 'an interest in property restricted in its enjoyment to the owner personally' within clause (d) of section 6 of that statute? these questions are not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 1953 (HC)

Dawoodbhai Kassamji Matiwalla and anr. Vs. Shaikhali Alibhoy

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1953Bom445; (1953)55BOMLR618; ILR1954Bom29

..... . it is true that the learned judge has held that the rate of interest was excessive, but in holding that, he was not considering the usurious loans act. although interest may be excessive, yet in a particular case it may not constitute sufficient evidence that the transaction was substantially unfair. in order that the ..... learned judge refused to allow the amendment holding that the amendment was applied for at a very late stage. it is pointed out that under the usurious loans act power is given to the court to reduce the rate of interest even where a suit is being heard 'ex parte', and therefore it is ..... of the suit. on the other hand, the contention of the mortgagor is that the rate is excessive and that it should be reduced under the usurious loans act and that the mortgages should not be allowed the contractual rate of interest even prior to filing of the suit. now, the learned judge. has ..... even without the amendment of the written statement the learned judge should have given effect to the provisions of the usurious loans act. now, in order that the court may exercise its discretion under that act, two conditions are necessary ; one is that the interest is excessive and the other is that the transaction was ..... , with regard to costs of the mortgagee subsequent to the date of the preliminary decree is also the principle on which the courts have always acted in dealing with the costs of the suit of the mortgagee prior to the date of the preliminary decree. but the question that we have .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //