SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Tushar Jarwal – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of India – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J.

1. The present LPA is arising out of an Order dated 06.07.2022 of a learned Single Judge of this Court, in W.P.(C.) No. 6913/2021 ("Impugned Order").

2. The undisputed facts of the present case reveal that the Appellants before this Court had applied for a joint housing loan and were accordingly sanctioned Rs.51,50,000/- from the State Bank of India, RAPC Branch, New Delhi.

3. The Appellants and the Respondent Bank entered into the Loan Agreement on 20.06.2009 and the same stipulated a fixed rate of interest at 8% for the first year and, thereafter, a floating rate of interest. The tenure of the loan was for 15 years (180 months), and the Appellants were required to furnish regular EMIs to repay the loan. Clause 5 of the Loan Agreement had provided that the Respondent Bank had a right to reduce or increase the EMI, or extend the repayment period, or both, consequent upon revision in the interest rate. Clause 4 (v) of the Loan Agreement had also granted liberty to the Respondent Bank to alter the rate of interest at its sole discretion in the event of major volatility in interest rates during the subsistence of the Loan Agreement. Clause 4

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top