High Court of Kerala
Case Law Search
I.SAIDUKUTTY v. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE - OP No. 666 of 2002(D)  RD-KL 14995 (6 August 2007)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMOP No. 666 of 2002(D)
1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE,
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.MUHAMMED
For Respondent :SRI.M.PATHROSE MATHAI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.O.P.No.666 OF 2002
Dated this the 6th day of August, 2007
The petitioner, then a non-resident Indian, had an NRE account with the Vakkom branch of State Bank of Travancore. The controversies raised by him led to his filing of a petition before the Consumer Disputes Redressel Forum, which resulted in Ext.P1 against the Bank. The Bank's appeal against that order was allowed by the State Commission as per Ext.P2. That was confirmed by the National Commission as per Ext.P3. The Special Leave Petition filed before the Apex Court was also dismissed as per Ext.P4. This writ petition is filed alleging that the plea of the Bank that has found favour before the authorities under the Consumer Protection Act is relatable to "Article 28 of the Term Deposit Agreement", which the petitioner is not aware of. He has therefore, filed this writ petition challenging that clause.
2. In opposition to this writ petition, the Bank has filed a counter affidavit on 3.1.2005 with copy to the counsel for the OP.666/02 Page numbers petitioner, clearly stating that the issue in hand relates to Chapter 28 of the Exchange Control Manual, which is applicable to all NRE deposits and that the action taken by the Bank in terms of that chapter has found favour wih the State Commission, National Commission, as also the Apex Court.
3. If the provisions of Chapter 28 of the Exchange Control
Manual is to be challenged, I would expect the Union of India to
be a party to this writ petition, which is not. That apart, the
provisions of the Exchange Control Manual is built, as well,
other statutory provisions, including FEMA, FERA etc, which
regulate the movement of money across the boundaries.
I find not justification to sustain any challenge against
the provisions in Chapter 28 of the Exchange Control Manual.
In the result, the writ petition fails, The same is
accordingly dismissed. No costs.
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JO.P.NO.666 OF 2002
6th AUGUST, 2007.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.