Hongkong And Shanghai Banking Corp. Ltd. Vs Awaz 2024 INSC 1044 – Credit Card Interest – NCDRC Judgment

Credit Card – The rate of interest, charged by the banks, determined by the financial wisdom & directives issued by the Reserve Bank of India, and is duly communicated to the credit card holders from time to time, cannot be in any manner unconscionable or unilateral. The credit card holders are duly educated and made aware of their privileges and obligations, including timely payment & levying of penalty on delay. (Para 70) -The decision of the National Commission to unilaterally hold that any interest above 30% p.a. is usurious is an encroachment upon the domain of the Reserve Bank of India. (Para 51)

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 -Section 2(1)(o)– The administrative policy decisions of banks, do not constitute provisions/facilities of banking, which may come under the umbrella of ‘service’- A policy decision pertaining to the rate of interest, and trade practices carried out by the banks across the country, is a regulatory function within the specific statutory domain of the Reserve Bank of India and cannot come under the purview of judicial scrutiny by the National Commission. (Para 46)

Consumer Protection Act, 1986- The requirement of obtaining prior permission from the Commission, for any consumer to act in a representative capacity, can in no way be dispensed with.(Para 43)

Consumer Protection Act, 1986- Section 2(1)(m) – A trust, whether registered under the Indian Trust Act, or the State Trust Registration Act, is not a “person” as defined under Section 2(1)(m). (Para 44)

Consumer Protection Act, 1986- Any trade practice which is adopted for the purpose of promoting the sale, use, or supply of any goods, or for the provision of any service, by adopting any unfair method or unfair or deceptive practice, has to be treated as ‘unfair trade practice’. Hence, whether an act can be condemned as an unfair trade practice, or not, the key is to examine the ‘modus operandi’ i.e. whether there is any false statement/ misrepresentation, or deception. (Para 68)

Interpretation of Statutes – Any direction or guideline, issued by a statutory authority, is an extension of the statute itself. Rules made under a statute must be treated, for all purposes of construction or obligations, exactly as if they were in that Act- The statutory presumption that the legislature whilst formulating laws has inserted every part thereunder for a purpose and that legislative intention, which should be given effect to, would be applicable to the present guidelines as well. (Para 56)

Contract – The terms of a contract executed between two parties, are not open to judicial scrutiny unless the same is arbitrary, discriminatory, mala fide or actuated by bias. The courts cannot strike down the terms of a contract, because it feels that some other terms would have been fair, wiser or logical. (Para 62) A contract, being a creature of an agreement between two or more parties, is to be interpreted giving the actual meaning to the words contained in the contract and it is not permissible for the Court to make a new contract, however reasonable, if the parties have not made it themselves- when a person signs a document which contains certain contractual terms, that normally parties are bound by such contract; it is for the parties to establish an exception in a suit. When a party to the contract disputes the binding nature of the signed document, it is for him to prove the terms, in the contract, or circumstances in which he came to sign the documents, need to be established. (Para 65)