IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
NUPUR BHATI, J.
Smt. Satyawati Gehlot - Petitioner
Versus
State Bank of India – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10953 of 2021
Decided On : 27-04-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's loan application and account background. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments on restructuring loan and statutory remedies. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. acknowledgment of irrelevant prayers due to deposit. (Para 6) |
| 4. court's reasoning against writ petition. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. petitioner may seek remedy before appropriate forum. (Para 11) |
ORDER :
(Nupur Bhati, J.)
The writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:-
(ii) The notice dated 01.07.2021 (Annexure-8) issued under Section 13 (2) of the Act of 2002 issued by the respondent bank may also kindly be quashed and set aside.
(iii) The respondent bank may kindly be directed to reconsider the petitioner's application for restructuring of loan account under its policy dated 01.09.2020 (Annexure-6) considering the loan account as regular account.
(iv) Any other appropriate order or direction, which may be deemed just and proper may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner."
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had applied for a home term loan facility with the respondent bank which was sanctioned on 26.10.2016 for a loan amount of Rs. 40,00,000/- for the residential plot situated at Dhoron ka Bas, Ward No.5, Kumharon ka Mohalla, Bikaner ad measuring 371 square yards in the name of Shivratan Gehlot. The husband of the petitioner was pledged as collateral security for securing the aforementioned home term loan facility. The amount of Rs. 40 lacs was sanctioned on 26.10.2016 and the same was debited to the loan account of the petitioner on 01.11.2016 and the installments were started from December, 2016, the petitioner has regularly paid the installments to the tune of Rs.43,500/-. The petitioner has regularly deposited the installments of the loan account and Rs.5,22,000/- against the 12 installments were deposited till 2018, 2019 and in January, February and March, 2020. On account of Covid pandemic-2019 in March, 2020 there was a complete lockdown enforced by the State Government and on account of the same, the repayment of the monthly installments was also exempted to those loanee who were industrialists on account of stoppage of business activity and who were not in a position to make payments, such exemption was granted from March 2020 to August, 2020 for a period of six months as per the RBI guidelines. A policy was issued by the respondent bank on 01.09.2020 for Covid-19 related stress framed on the basis of policy statement issued by RBI on dated 06.08.2020. Thereafter, the petitioner was advised to make application for availing the benefit of this policy for restructuring her loan and accordingly, the petitioner submitted an application with the deposition of Rs. 20,000/- in the loan account of the respondent bank. The respondent bank officials assured that restructuring of her loan would be done as soon as approval was received. Thereafter, the respondent bank asked the petitioner to deposit some more amount as the approval was not received and the petitioner deposited some more amount with the respondent bank. The respondent bank informed the petitioner on 22.01.2021 that as two installments were due uptill February, 2020 therefore, the petitioner could not be given the benefit of the policy for restructuring of the loan account. The petitioner thereafter, again approached the respondent bank on 15.02.2021 for extending her the benefit of the policy for restructuring of the loan account however, the respondent bank refused and warned them that the due amount be deposited uptill 25.02.2021 or else the loan amount would be declared as Non Performing Assets (NPA). The petitioner being aggrieved of the same, preferred an application under Section 22 -B of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987. A reply was filed by respondent
The statutory scheme of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Act, 2002) does not provide for a legal remedy until the Section 13(4....
Judicial restraint is required under Article 226 when alternative statutory remedies are available, especially in financial recovery matters.
The classification of a borrower's account as NPA under the SARFAESI Act is not justiciable in writ jurisdiction until measures under section 13(4) are invoked, necessitating the exhaustion of statut....
Eligibility for loan restructuring under RBI circulars is determined by specific conditions, including the account's classification as a standard asset and the date of implementation of the restructu....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.