Skip to main content

Banks can publish photos of wilful defaulters 

By refusing to interfere with the the judgement and order  dated 28/11/2013 in WPL No.2808/2013 of The HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY, the Hon'ble Supreme Court Vide order dated 14/7/14 in the SLP(C) NO. 37726 of 2013 has allowed the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the matter of D.J. Exim vs SBI,  wherein the Hon'ble Bomaby HC allowed photographs of defaulters to be publish subject to certain conditions.


Bombay High Court on 28/11/2013 refused to stop publication of photographs of a defaulter firm in newspapers, saying that it was in larger public interest.

The division bench of Justices V M Kanade and M S Sonak refused to grant relief to the firm D J Exim and its directors






State Bank of India, on October 10, had issued the firm a letter warning that if it did not repay loan amount, photographs of the directors would be published in national newspapers.

The company moved the High Court against this saying no rule permits banks to publish photos.

"They cannot embarrass the defaulters like this. According to the rule only name and address can be published," the firm's lawyers argued.

However SBI counsel Aspi Chinoy pointed out that the company had defaulted on repayment of Rs 53 crores.

"This is not disputed. They are admitted defaulters. We are only stating this fact to the public," he argued, and said the bank "does not resort to such stringent measures" in each and every case.

Accepting this argument, High Court observed that publishing of photographs serves the purpose of creating awareness and cautioning prospective clients.

"In our view, there would be no impediment to publication of photos of the defaulters. There is no legal bar which expressly prohibits the bank from publishing photos.

"However, the decision to resort to such measures should be taken by a very senior level official not below the rank of General Manager of the bank. In this case, due process was followed and the decision cannot be faulted," the court said.

In the past, while the Bombay, Madras and Madhya Pradesh HCs had allowed banks to publish the names and photographs of defaulters, the Calcutta and Kerala HCs held such moves as unconstitutional and impermissible in law while ruling on some cases.






Articles referred: http://www.financialexpress.com/news/name-shame-banks-can-publish-photos-of-wilful-defaulters-says-sc/1270658






Article referred: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-11-28/news/44547088_1_defaulter-newspapers-high-court
















































Comments











Post a Comment



















Most viewed this month



















Amendment of plaint under  Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC explained




























Cause Title :  Ganesh Prasad vs Rajeshwar Prasad, SLP (C) NO. 28377 OF 2018, Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : 14/3/2023 Corum : J. B. Pardiwala, J. Citied:  Revajeetu Builders and Developers v. Narayanaswamy & Sons and Others reported in (2009) 10 SCC 84 North Eastern Railway Administration, Gorakhpur v. Bhagwan Das reported in (2008) 8 SCC 511 P.A. Jayalakshmi v. H. Saradha and Others reported in (2009) 14 SCC 525 B.K. Narayana Pillai v. Parameswaran Pillai and Another reported in (2000) 1 SCC 712 A.K. Gupta and Sons Ltd. v. Damodar Valley Corporation reported in AIR 1967 SC 96 Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited and Another, Civil Appeal No. 5909 of 2022 dated 01.09.2022 Firm Sriniwas Ram Kumar v. Mahabir Prasad and Others reported in AIR 1951 SC 177 G. Nagamma and Another v. Siromanamma and Another reported in (1996) 2 SCC 25 Praful Manohar Rele v. Krishnabai Narayan Ghosalkar and Others reported in (2014...




















Post a Comment









Read more




























Even An Unregistered Partnership Firm Can Maintain ‘Cheque Bounce’ Complaint




























 In M/s Uttam Traders Ranghri vs. Tule Ram alias Tula Ram, an appeal was filed before the Himachal Pradesh High Court solely on the ground that one of the partners of the complainant-firm which is an unregistered partnership concern, had failed to prove that he was one of the partners of the complainant-firm and duly authorised by it to file the complaint and acquitted the respondent.     The High Court decided that two questions arise for consideration in this matter :-     1) Whether acquittal by the magistrate solely on the ground that the managing partner of the appellant having failed to establish that he was one of the partners of the complainant-firm and duly authorised by it to file the complaint was correct   2) Whether a partner of an unregistered partnership firm can maintain a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.     For the first issue, the High Court referred to M/s Haryana State Co.Op., Supply and Marketing Federation Ltd. vs. M/s Jayam Text...




















2 comments









Read more




























Interim order staying the operation of an impugned order vs quashment of an impugned order




























In Deific Abode LLP vs Union of India & Ors., while discussing on the issue of interim order staying the operation of an impugned order and the quashment of an impugned order, the Calcutta High Court observed that :- These salient principles emerge: i. As per the law laid down in Shree Chamundi Mopeds Ltd (supra) by the Supreme Court, the effect of an interim order staying the operation of an impugned order and the quashment of an impugned order are considerably different from one another. While the former merely ensures that the order impugned would not be operative from the date of the passing of the order of stay, without annihilating the said impugned order from existence, the latter ensures that such quashment results in the restoration of the position as it stood on the date the impugned order was passed, with the impugned order ceasing to exist in the eyes of the law. ii. Quashment of such impugned order would revive the appeal before the appellate authority and would be con...




















Post a Comment









Read more