Radha M Nair Vs Axis Bank Ltd. and Anr. — Banking and Recovery | Delhi HC (2026)

Radha M Nair Vs Axis Bank Ltd. and Anr. — Banking and Recovery | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief granted; petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to seek adjudication before the DRT, including liberty to urge the issue of interest, which the DRT will decide in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether Respondent No. 1 Bank should be directed to consider the petitioner's settlement request as per the Guidelines issued by Respondent No. 2, with simple interest and after removing the exorbitant rate of interest, cost, charges and penalties imposed in the account. +2 more

Court's answer

The petitioner shall be at liberty to urge the issue of interest before the DRT, and it shall be decided in accordance with law by the DRT.

Ratio / Principle

The reliefs sought in the present petition are to be adjudicated by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002; the petitioner has an equally efficacious remedy available there.

Key takeaways

Granting the said liberty to pursue the matter before the DRT, the present petition is disposed of.ratio¶20
The Court neither examined the merits of the controversy nor commented on the same; the merits stand left open.obiter¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Jasmeet Singh, J.), order dated 09.03.2026 in W.P.(C) 689/2024 — Radha M Nair v. Axis Bank Ltd. & Anr.: Petitioner, whose husband had been sanctioned a reverse mortgage loan on 12.04.2008 repayable in 120 equal instalments (which fell into default, prompting a Section 13(2) notice under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 from Respondent No. 1), sought a mandamus directing the Bank to consider her settlement request per the Guidelines of Respondent No. 2, with simple interest and after removing exorbitant interest, cost, charges and penalties, and sought restraint against the impugned notices dated 10.02.2023. The Court held that these reliefs are to be adjudicated by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, where the petitioner has an equally efficacious remedy, and disposed of the petition accordingly, granting liberty to urge the issue of interest before the DRT, to be decided in accordance with law. The Court expressly neither examined nor commented on the merits of the controversy.

$~23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- W.P.(C) 689/2024 & CM APPL. 3065/2024, CM APPL. 37568/2025 RADHA M NAIR

.....Petitioner

Through: Appearance not given

versus

AXIS BANK LTD. AND ANR

.....Respondent

Through: Adv Sanjay Kumar R1

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R % 09.03.2026

This is a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:-

“a. Issue a writ/ order/ direction in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ/ order/ direction of like nature for directing the Respondent No. 1 Bank to consider the proposal/request made by the petitioner for settlement of account as per Guidelines issued by Respondent No. 2 with simple interest and by removing exorbitant rate of interest, cost, charges and penalties imposed in the account.

b. Issue a writ, order or direction prohibiting the Respondents and / or their servants, agents, assignees and officers and / or any one claiming through or under them from giving any effect and / or further effect and / or taking any steps and / or acting in furtherance of the Notices Impugned Notices dated 10.02.2023

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/03/2026 at 13:46:03

issued by the Respondent Bank in any manner whatsoever; . . .”

The case of the petitioner is that the husband of the petitioner was sanctioned a loan on 12.04.2008 being a reverse mortgage loan which was to be repaid in 120 equal instalments.

Since there were defaults, the respondent No.1 issued a Section 13(2) notice under SARFAESI Act, 2002.

The reliefs sought in the present petition are to be adjudicated by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2002. The petitioner has an equally efficacious remedy available.

Granting the said liberty, the present petition is disposed of.

The petitioner shall be at liberty to urge the issue of interest also, which shall be decided in accordance with law by DRT.

The Court has neither examined the merits of the controversy nor has commented on the same.

JASMEET SINGH, J

MARCH 9, 2026 / (MS)

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/03/2026 at 13:46:03