Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 6562
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Devan Ramachandran, J
P.M. PRASANTH – Appellant
Versus
BRANCH MANAGER ICICI BANK LTD – Respondent
WP(C) 2073/2024
RASMI NAIR T., LAL K JOSEPH C.Ajith Kumar P.MURALEEDHARAN (THURAVOOR)(K/1651/2000) T.A.LUXY(L-78) SURESH SUKUMAR(K/634/1997) ANZIL SALIM(K/000447/2018) SANJAY SELLEN(K/885/2021)
Credit rating agencies cannot retain the information of a written-off loan in the credit information of the borrower.
Headnote:
CREDIT RATING - REMOVAL OF LOAN STATUS - WRITTEN OFF LOAN:
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner sought a direction to remove the status of a loan availed from the 1st respondent from the credit information kept by respondents 2 to 5.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that the 2nd respondent submitted that the loan in question had been written off and would abide by any direction issued by the court.
Issues: Whether the credit rating agencies can retain the information of a written-off loan in the credit information of the borrower.
Ratio Decidendi: If the information relating to the loan in question is not one which can affect the rating of the petitioner - either because it is written off as per law or settled in terms of consent of the parties - then nothing can stand in the way of respondents 2 to 5 in acceding to the request of the petitioner.
Final Decision: The court directed respondents 2 to 5 to hear the petitioner and the 1st respondent and take a decision on the petitioner's claim for alteration of his credit rating within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
JUDGMENT
The limited plea of the petitioner is that the respondents be directed to “remove the status of the loan availed from the 1st respondent from the credit information kept by the respondents
2 to 5” (sic), within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. Interestingly, Sri.C.Ajith Kumar - appearing for the 2nd respondent, submitted that, as per the information given by the first respondent, the loan in question has been written off and therefore, that his client will abide by any direction to be issued by this Court.
3. I notice from the file that even though respondents 3 to
5 have been issued notice by E.mail by the petitioner, as ordered by this Court, there is no appearance on their behalf today.
4. Sri.Lal K.Joseph – learned counsel appearing for the first respondent, submitted that, if the loan has already been written off, then he would not stand in the way of apposite orders being issued by this Court, to the credit rating agencies. He, however, sought liberty for his client to be heard while any such exercise is taken forward because, the factum of the loan having been written off, is one that they will require to verify.
5. When I evaluate and consider the afore submissions, it is evident that, if the information relating to the loan in question is not one which can affect the rating of the petitioner - either because it is written off as per law or settled in terms of consent of the parties - then nothing can stand in the way of respondents 2 to 5 in acceding to the request of the petitioner. Of course, for this, they must hear both sides, before taking a final decision.
6. That said, since the 2nd respondent is represented through counsel; and who, as seen above, submits that the account has been written off, I am certain that this Court can issue orders to them on its terms.
7. In the result, I direct respondents 2 to 5 to immediately hear the first respondent and the petitioner - either physically or online; and then take a decision on the claim of the petitioner for alteration of his credit rating, adverting to the submission of Sri.Ajith Kumar that, according to the information received by the second respondent, the loan account in question has been written off by the first respondent.
8. The afore exercise shall be completed by each of the respondents 2 to 5 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
For the afore purpose, I permit the petitioner to produce a certified copy of the judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition, to each of the respondents 2 to 5, so that they can comply with the directions herein; and the time frame fixed above will begin from the date on which it is so furnished.
