LAWS(KER)-2021-1-220

JOY KURIAKOSE Vs. AXIS BANK

Decided On January 22, 2021
Joy Kuriakose Appellant
V/S
AXIS BANK Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, Proprietor of a business, is before this Court aggrieved by the action of the 1 st respondent-Bank withholding benefits of Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme (ECLGS) to the petitioner. The petitioner seeks to command the 2nd respondent to implement the Scheme by issuing necessary directions.

(2.) The petitioner states that he is a businessman and holds an account with the 1st respondent-Bank. In the month of April, the Reserve Bank of India announced a special Scheme to help the entrepreneurs who were affected by the lockdown declared by the Government. The Scheme is called Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme (ECLGS) and the petitioner submits that he is entitled to 46 lakhs as loan under the Scheme. Though the Bank has sanctioned 46 lakhs to the petitioner under the Scheme, the petitioner was permitted to utilise only an amount of 17.75 lakhs. The balance amount, which is more than 28 lakhs, has been appropriated by the Bank towards dues to them. The petitioner would submit that the ECLGS has been framed in view of the peculiar financial circumstance in the country and it is intended to provide working capital to entrepreneurs. The Bank has no authority to appropriate any amount from the working capital loan so provided, towards any dues to the Bank. Therefore, the 1st respondent is bound to pay the petitioner the balance amount of about 28 lakhs.

(3.) The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1 st respondent filed statement and additional statement and strongly resisted the contentions of the petitioner. The Standing Counsel submitted that whatever appropriation was made by the Bank, it was with the concurrence of the petitioner only. Had the Bank did not appropriate such amounts towards the dues of the petitioner, the petitioner would have been put to more grave situation and his account would have been turned into a NPA.