Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 34663 (KAR)

MR VIPIN SETHI v. THE BANKING OMBUDSMAN

WP/6832/2022 · 2026-08-11

M G S Kamal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010145272022 NC: 2026:KHC:42504 WP No. 6832 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 6832 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MR VIPIN SETHI S/O K.L. SETHI AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, 2. MRS RAJNI SETHI W/O VIPIN SETHI, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, BOTH RESIDING AT NO.112, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, 2ND STAGE, 2ND PHASE, 6TH MAIN, BENGALURU-560 086. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SRIDHAR G.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE BANKING OMBUDSMAN C/O RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, 10/3/8, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, REPRESENTED BY MS SARASWATHI SHYAMPRASAD, EMAIL. CRPC@RBI.ORG.IN. BENGALURU-560 001. 2. CANARA BANK RAJAJINAGAR 1ST BLOCK BRANCH, HAVING OFFICE AT NO.8, 2ND FLOOR, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010145272022 NC: 2026:KHC:42504 WP No. 6832 of 2022 NEXT TO GODREJ SHOWROOM, DR.RAJ KUMAR ROAD, RAJAJINAGAR, 1ST BLOCK, BENGALURU-560 010. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (R1 - SERVED SRI. VIKRAM UNNI RAJAGOPAL., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 08.03.2022 SENT BY R1 INTIMATION CLOSURE FOR COMPLAINT AGAINST CANARA BANK VIDE ANNEXURE-A; DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO REFUND THE EXCESS AMOUNT OF INTEREST COLLECTED FROM THE PETITIONERS AMOUNTING TO RS.96,42,821/- (RUPEES NINETY SIX LAKHS FORTY TWO THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND TWENTY ONE ONLY) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010145272022 NC: 2026:KHC:42504 WP No. 6832 of 2022 ORAL ORDER 1. Petitioners are before this Court seeking following reliefs: ''(a). Quash the impugned order dated 08.03.2022 bearing complaint No. N202122002014573 sent by Respondent No.1 intimation closure for complaint against Canara Bank, produced as "Annexure A". (b). Direct the Respondents to refund the excess amount of interest collected from the Petitioners amounting to Rs. 96,42,821/(Rupees Ninety-Six lakhs forty-two thousand eight hundred and twenty-one only). (c). Direct the Respondents to pay compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty Lakhs Only). (d). Grant such other and further relief/s including cost, as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interests of justice and equity.'' 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as regards prayer column (a) is concerned, the only grievance of the petitioner is that, when the petitioners had approached the respondent No.1-Banking Ombudsman, alleging irregularities committed by the respondent No.2-Bank in charging the penal interest, the respondent No.1-Banking Ombudsman, without even hearing the petitioner, accepting the stand of the respondent No.2-Bank has closed the matter. 3. As regards, the prayer column (b) and (c), he submits that the petitioners have initiated proceedings before the - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010145272022 NC: 2026:KHC:42504 WP No. 6832 of 2022 State Consumer Redressal Commission and the matter is thus seized. Therefore, he would insist consideration only of prayer (a). 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2-Bank, fairly submits that since the petitioner is restricting the writ petition to the extent of prayer at column (a), an opportunity be granted to the petitioner directing the respondent No.1-Banking Ombudsman to reconsider the matter. 5. Submissions are placed on record. 6. Perusal of the order of the respondent No.1-Banking Ombudsman produced at Annexure-A, indicate that the complaint raised by the petitioners has been closed, purportedly on receipt of the reply by the respondent No.2-Bank. There is no indication of respondent No.1- Ombudsman having given or furnished the copy of the reply filed by the respondent No.2-Bank to the petitioner. It also does not indicate any response being sought by the petitioners. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010145272022 NC: 2026:KHC:42504 WP No. 6832 of 2022 7. The respondent No.1-Banking Ombudsman who is vested with a judicious powers is required to comply with the principles of natural justice before arriving at the conclusion in exercise of its power conferred under the Regulations. The impugned order does not reflect compliance of the same. 8. In that view of the matter, impugned order at Annexure- A dated 08.03.2022 is hereby quashed. Matter is remitted to the respondent No.1-Banking Ombudsman, who shall furnish the reply, which is stated to have been filed by the respondent No.2-Bank to the petitioners and on receipt of the response of the petitioners, proceed to pass appropriate order thereof. 9. Since the parties are represented by their respective learned counsels, they shall appear before the respondent No.1-Banking Ombudsman on 10.09.2026 without any further notice. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010145272022 NC: 2026:KHC:42504 WP No. 6832 of 2022 10. The respondent No.1-Banking Ombudsman shall proceed to pass appropriate Order in accordance with law as directed above. Petition is disposed of, accordingly. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20