HDFC BANK LTD Vs. CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this Writ Petition is against Exts.P-3 and P-8, which are the complaint filed by the second respondent before the first respondent Forum as well as the interim order issued by that Forum, respectively.

(2.) Petitioner is a banking company. The second respondent had availed a term loan from the Lord Krishna Bank which got merged with the Centurion Bank and subsequently got merged with the petitioner Bank. According to the petitioner, the loan in question was secured through mortgage of immovable properties. But the second respondent had defaulted repayment and the Bank had issued repeated de- mands. The second respondent thereupon approached the first respondent Forum by filing Ext.P-3 complaint disputing the demand on the ground that the rate of interest claimed is exorbitant.

(3.) During pendency of Ext.P-3 complaint, the petitioner Bank proceeded with steps as contemplated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and Ext.P-4 notice was issued under S.13(2) of the Act. Ext.P-5 is the version filed by the petitioner Bank before the Forum against the complaint. But when the second respondent was issued with Ext.P-4 notice he approached the Forum by filing Ext.P-6 interim application to which the petitioner Bank had filed Ext.P-7 objections (counter). The first respondent Forum had considered Ext.P-6 application and in spite of the objections raised by the petitioner Bank, regarding the maintainability of the complaint, the forum had issued Ext.P-8 order restraining the petitioner from proceeding with any further steps against the property in question.