Repeated non-compliance with court orders in financial disputes can lead to dismissal of petitions while allowing recourse to statutory tribunals.

JUDGMENT

(Dated this the 30th day of January, 2026)

The petitioner and her husband are borrowers under housing loan agreements with the respondent bank. The petitioner had been regularly paying the instalments until the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

2. The petitioner earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.16440/2021, and this Court by Ext.P1 judgment directed the petitioner to pay the overdue amount of ₹3,33,625/- along with all applicable charges and interest in eight equal monthly instalments commencing from 15.09.2021.

3. Thereafter, the petitioner again approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.3508/2024 and by Ext.P2 judgment, this Court entertained the writ petition and granted 12 equal monthly instalments for remitting the outstanding amount of ₹46,96,432/-. The said judgment was passed on 30.01.2024;

but the same was not complied with.

4. The petitioner again approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.37628/2025, which was disposed of on 14.10.2025, directing the petitioner to remit the outstanding amount of ₹50,04,555/- in two equal monthly instalments, the first instalment on 05.11.2025 and the second on 05.12.2025. The petitioner could not remit the amount due to financial constraints and has again approached this Court by filing the present writ petition seeking a direction to dispose of Ext.P6 and to provide accurate loan statements to the petitioner.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits that from 2021 onwards, the petitioner has been filing writ petitions one after another before this Court and, after obtaining orders, has not complied with the same. It is contended that such conduct is only to protract the proceedings and for delaying payment.

6. In the earlier litigation, as evidenced by Ext.P3, this Court had already disposed of the writ petition on 14.10.2025 directing the petitioner to remit the outstanding amount in two equal monthly instalments. The petitioner has not challenged the proceedings before the Debts Recovery Tribunal till date and has not complied with the judgments of this Court.

In such circumstances, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition, and accordingly, it is dismissed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal challenging the coercive proceedings against her.

Sd/-