https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109690 A statutory complaint mechanism determining banking-service grievances must operate quasi-judicially, within the Banking Ombudsman Scheme, 1995, and with reasons. The Madras High Court held that the Banking Ombudsman was bound to consider complaints in accordance with the scheme because the process affected parties' rights and required reasoned decision-making. A rejection made without hearing the complainant, without disclosing the bank's remarks, and without recording reasons was held to violate natural justice, reflect non-application of mind, and be unsustainable. The complaint was therefore quashed and required fresh reconsideration after disclosure of remarks and an opportunity of hearing and further representation. en-us Thu, 25 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Apr 2012 13:34:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109690 A statutory complaint mechanism determining banking-service grievances must operate quasi-judicially, within the Banking Ombudsman Scheme, 1995, and with reasons. The Madras High Court held that the Banking Ombudsman was bound to consider complaints in accordance with the scheme because the process affected parties' rights and required reasoned decision-making. A rejection made without hearing the complainant, without disclosing the bank's remarks, and without recording reasons was held to violate natural justice, reflect non-application of mind, and be unsustainable. The complaint was therefore quashed and required fresh reconsideration after disclosure of remarks and an opportunity of hearing and further representation. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 25 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109690