Back
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Dharanidhar Karimojji – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
[Satish Chandra Sharma, J.]
1. The Petitioner before this Court has filed this present Petition in public interest under Article 226 of the Constitution of India stating that he holds a Bachelor of Technology Degree and is working as Freelancer in digital marketing.
2. The Petitioner has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ or direction directing the Respondents to regulate and control working of online digital lenders doing the business of lending through Mobile Applications or any other platform, as well as restraining them from charging exorbitant interest on loan from borrowers, to restrain the lenders from harassing the borrowers and to save the borrowers from recovery agents and to fix the maximum interest of rate chargeable by online digital lenders.
3. A prayer has also been made to set up Grievance Redressal Mechanism for borrowers in every State/Union of India.
4. The Petitioner, as stated by him, is working as a Freelancer in Digital Marketing, and his contention is that online lending platforms are offering loan to the needy people through online applications (Apps). It has been stated that there are 300 instant personal loan Apps in Play-Store, and loan
Chapter III-B of the RBI Act is a complete code in itself and the power of intervention available for the RBI over NBFCs, is from the cradle to the grave.
The RBI's imposition of directives under Section 35A of the Banking Regulation Act does not necessitate pre-decisional hearings, emphasizing the need for depositor protection over procedural formalit....
Banks must adhere to RBI guidelines regarding interest rates and cannot charge excessive rates without borrower consent, ensuring transparency and fairness in lending practices.
(1) Administrative policy decisions of Banks, do not constitute provisions/facilities of banking which may come under umbrella of ‘service’, defined under Section 2(1)(o) of Consumer Protection Act, ....
The court affirmed that Payment Aggregators qualify as payment systems under the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007, validating RBI's authority to impose authorization and financial regulations....
Companies can be held liable under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act for facilitating actions that constitute proceeds of crime, irrespective of whether they are named as accused.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
