Vinod Arora vs National Housing Bank & Anr.
2015 Latest Caselaw 4140 Del

$~4
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     W.P.(C) 5007/2015
      VINOD ARORA                                     ..... Petitioner
                         Through: Mr. Neeraj Kumar Jha, Advocate
                         versus
      NATIONAL HOUSING BANK & ANR.               ..... Respondents
                    Through: Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Advocate for R-1
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
              ORDER

% 22.05.2015 CM No.9042/2015 (Exemption)

1. Allowed subject to just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 5007/2015

2. Issue notice to the respondents.

3. Ms. Takiar accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1.

4. In view of the order that I propose to pass, for the moment, no notice need be issued to respondent no.2.

5. The broad grievance of the petitioner is that respondent no.2 seeks to levy foreclosure charges / pre-payment penalties contrary to the circular dated 03.09.2014.

6. It is not in dispute that Grievance Redressal Policy (as revised on 04.12.2014) has been put in place by respondent no.2 6.1 It is in terms of the said policy that in the first instance respondent no.1 had the grievance of the petitioner examined by respondent no.2. Consequent thereto, respondent no.2 vide communication dated 05.02.2015 W.P.(C) 5007/2015 page 1 of 2 has communicated to the petitioner that since the principal borrower was a "non-individual" it cannot take benefit of the aforementioned circular, which provides for waiver of foreclosure charges / pre-payment penalties.

7. The petitioner's entire case is that he is the sole proprietor of a proprietorship concern, going by the name of Himani Garments Manufacture Company. If that be so, prima facie what the petitioner says appears to be correct.

7.1 However, since Ms. Takiar has said that respondent no.1 is willing to treat the writ petition as an appeal and deliberate upon the grievance made within a period of four weeks, a direction is issued to that effect to respondent no.1.

7.2 Accordingly, respondent no.1 will treat the writ petition as an appeal and render a decision on the same, within four weeks from today after due notice to respondent no.2.

7.3 Respondent no.1 will pass a reasoned order and a copy of the decision so rendered, will be supplied to the petitioner. In case the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision taken, he will have liberty to take further action; albeit in accordance with law.

7.4 With the aforesaid observations in place, the captioned petition and the pending application are disposed of.

8. List for compliance on 31.07.2015.

                                             RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
MAY 22, 2015
yg
W.P.(C) 5007/2015                                        page 2 of 2