IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.229 of 2007 ASHIRWAD AGENCY (Dealer, B.P.C.L.), Bye Pass Road, MOKAMA, P.O./P.S. – MOKAMA, DISTT- PATNA, THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR NAMELY, SHAILENDRA KUMAR @ SHAILENDRA KUMAR SINGH S/O LATE BIBHIKSHAN SHARMA, RESIDENT OF MAIN ROAD, MOKAMA, P.O./P.S. MOKAMA, DISTT. PATNA - VERSUS- 1. BANK OF BARODA, BALCHAND STREET, MUMBAI THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN 2. THE ZONAL MANAGER, BIHAR-JHARKHAND, AND ORISSA ZONE, BANK OF BARODA, BORING ROAD, PATNA. 3. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, BANK OF BARODA, BORING ROAD, PATNA. 4. THE SENIOR BRANCH MANAGER, BANK OF BARODA, MOKAMA BRANCH, P.O./P.S.MOKAMA, DISTRICT- PATNA AND 5. THE ACCOUNTANT, BANK OF BARODA, MOKAMA BRANCH, P.O./P.S. MOKAMA, DISTT- PATNA ----------- 2. 26.11.2008 The review application filed to review the order dated 05.9.2007 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 8600 of 2007, is in fact for clarification of one time in that specific time relates to overdraft and charging of interest on such interest. That specific time is it has also been stated that the dispute relating to overdraft, which has been made by the petitioner, for this amount will have to make payment of interest.” Petitioner’s case is that taking advantage of these two lines, Respondent/ Board has been changing its stand. Petitioners on 20.03.2007 had purchased a draft amounting to Rs 3,88,048/- from a particular Branch of respondent Bank. Petitioner’s case is that on the date of purchase and till 20.06.2007, there was sufficient amount available in his account. The respondent Bank - 2 - instead of debits, the amount from his account vested till such date. When over amount was available in his account and taking it as overdraft charged on this amount. Only clarification required is whether delayed debit from the account of petitioners by Respondent Bank could be treated as overdraft, for charging interest. If on the to particular date, the amount is available in the account of the customer for which draft was purchased, it cannot be treated as overdraft. If the bank has charged any interest on such amount on account of delayed debit, petitioner is liable for its adjustment. As directed in the earlier order dated 05.09.2007, he must make payment of his dues to the bank without any delay, preferably within two months. Review application is disposed of. AKV/ (Mridula Mishra,J.)