Madras High Court
R.Lakshmi Narayanan vs The Regional Director on 3 January, 2022
W.P.(MD).No.23223 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 03.01.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
W.P.(MD).No.23223 of 2021
R.Lakshmi Narayanan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Regional Director,
Reserve Bank of India,
Fort Glacis,
No.16, Rajaji Salai,
Chennai – 600 001.
2.The Authorized Officer,
D.B.S.Bank India Ltd.,
Regional Office,
IInd Floor, Salem Main Road,
Kathaparai,
Karur – 639 006.
3.The Branch Manager,
D.B.S.Bank India Ltd.,
Trichy Main Branch,
1st Floor, Big Bazaar Street,
Trichy. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, by directing the respondents to
give time for six months for settling the loan dues through One Time Settlement
by waiving the interest amount including penal interest and other charges
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.P.(MD).No.23223 of 2021
incurred in the petitioner's loan account, on the basis of the petitioner's
representation dated 15.12.2021.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Ramanathan
ORDER
The Hon'ble Supreme Court had very clearly held by judgment
dated 15.12.2021 in 2021 SCC online SC 1255 in the case of The Bijnor
Urban Cooperative Bank Limited, Bijnor & others Vs Meenal Agarwal &
others that the High Courts have no authority to examine or even direct
consideration of one time settlement to any bank.
2. After examining in detail the relevant provisions, it was held as
follows:
11.The sum and substance of the aforesaid
discussion would be that no writ of
mandamus can be issued by the High Court
in exercise of powers under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, directing a
financial institution/bank to positively
grant the benefit of OTS to a borrower. The
grant of benefit under the OTS is always
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.23223 of 2021
subject to the eligibility criteria mentioned
under the OTS Scheme and the guidelines
issued from time to time. If the
bank/financial institution is of the opinion
that the loanee has the capacity to make
the payment and/or that the bank/financial
institution is able to recover the entire loan
amount even by auctioning the mortgaged
property/secured property, either from the
loanee and/or guarantor, the bank would
be justified in refusing to grant the benefit
under the OTS Scheme. Ultimately, such a
decision should be left to the commercial
wisdom of the bank whose amount is
involved and it is always to be presumed
that the financial institution/bank shall
take a prudent decision whether to grant
the benefit or not under the OTS Scheme,
having regard to the public interest
involved and having regard to the factors
which are narrated hereinabove.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.23223 of 2021
12. In view of the aforesaid discussion and for the
reasons stated above, we are of the firm opinion
that the High Court, in the present case, has
materially erred and has exceeded in its
jurisdiction in issuing a writ of mandamus in
exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India by directing the appellant-
Bank to positively consider/grant the benefit of
OTS to the original writ petitioner. The impugned
judgment and order passed by the High Court is
hence unsustainable and deserves to be quashed
and set aside and is accordingly quashed and set
aside.
3. In the instant case, the bank which is involved is the
D.B.S.Bank India Limited which is shown as the second and third respondents.
Since the judgment of the Supreme Court is binding on this Court, the Writ
Petition stands dismissed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.23223 of 2021
4. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the second and
third respondents directly.
5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no
order as to costs.
03.01.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
Nsr
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is
presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the
advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1.The Regional Director,
Reserve Bank of India,
Fort Glacis,
No.16, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.
2.The Authorized Officer,
D.B.S.Bank India Ltd.,
Regional Office,
IInd Floor, Salem Main Road,
Kathaparai, Karur – 639 006.
3.The Branch Manager,
D.B.S.Bank India Ltd.,
Trichy Main Branch,
1st Floor, Big Bazaar Street, Trichy.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.23223 of 2021
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.
Nsr
W.P.(MD).No.23223 of 2021
03.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
