Exactly, It is hilarious that people who used to witchunt about who shared the trick on twitter/forum etc blaming that it led to devaluation while the actual reason for devaluation are abusers are jumping on technicality that it is Axis's fault for not having a "robust" system. Reminds of that Upmanyu joke, "Murderer toh gala kaatega hi, tum kyun gala leke bahar nikle?"
And also, as mentioned in the forum, for contracts/debts the statute of limitations is 3 years. There is a doctrine of good faith and IPC Sec 52 clearly defines an act not done in good faith. There are various cases where a contract has to be executed in good faith by both parties.
- In the case of Union of India v. D.N. Revri & Co.,(1976) the Hon'ble Court emphasized adopting a common-sense approach in interpreting contracts, ensuring that the essence and benefit for both parties are not thwarted by narrow or pedantic interpretations, particularly in commercial contracts subject to policy changes.
- The intention of the parties, which is crucial in determining the scope of good faith in contracts, can be ascertained from the express words used, the nature of the subject matter, the nature of the contract itself, and the surrounding circumstances, as held in the case of Swarnam Ramachandran v. Aravacode Chakungal Jayapalan (2004).
In the case of Kailas Sizing Works v. Municipality of Bhivandi and Nizampur,(1968) the Hon'ble Court elucidated that acting in good faith necessitates acting honestly, with fairness and uprightness, or willful negligence or consciousness of causing injury to others.
www.drishtijudiciary.com
What are the potential consequences for violating the principle of good faith in contractual dealings? Breach of Contract: Failure to act in good faith constitutes a breach of the implied contractual obligations, rendering the defaulting party liable for damages or other remedies available under the law of contracts.
The bank can allege that the No Dues Certificate was issued under a material mistake of fact i.e., the bank did not know the extent of the exploitation at the time. Under Section 20 or 21 of the Indian Contract Act, a contract or release granted under a fundamental mistake may be voidable or subject to restitution. Also, it has been established that providing a No Dues Certificate does not mean that they cannot file for damages later. (
https://law.asia/no-claim-certification-does-not-relinquish-claims/)
Also, as per Section 70 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the principle of unjust enrichment, Axis bank can argue that the customers cannot be allowed to profit from a known mistake or glitch.
The only thing Axis needs to show is that these transactions were done to defraud the bank. Now people who did it once or twice most probably did not do it with intention to defraud. But people who did it repeatedly, it will show the clear intent to defraud.
So, since we are not in North Korea, the rule of the law stands, and Axis does have a strong legal stand. Let's see if they would go all the way or not. I doubt it cause Axis management has been known to be impotent, incompetent and useless.
Edit: Ohh and if they defined the value as 20p, they just can't come and ask for 40p. So, this aspect will most probably get settled at 20p or less.
