Petitioners sought MCLR benefits on a 2008 housing loan. The court directed the Bank to consider a new representation within a month and disposed of the writ petition without granting immediate relief.
Bank to consider petitioner's representation on MCLR claim within one month from receipt.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
WEDNESDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 15TH ASWINA, 1942 WP(C).No.14273 OF 2020(H)
PETITIONERS:
1 NARAYANA PRABHU S., AGED 51 YEARS, S/O P. SREEDHARA PRABHU, ANUGRAH, CC 48/2005-E, R.M.V ROAD, ELAMAKKARA, KOCHI-682 026.
2 P.H. JYOTHYLEKSHMI, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O NARAYANA PRABHU S, ANUGRAH, CC 48/2005-E, R.M.V ROAD, ELAMAKKARA, KOCHI-682 026.
BY ADV. SRI.K.R.VINOD
RESPONDENTS:
1 CORPORATION BANK, EDAPPALLY BRANCH, KURIEKKAL TOWER, GROUND FLOOR, POOKKATUPADY ROAD, EDAPPALLY TOLL, COCHIN-682 024, REP BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
BY ADV. SRI.S.B.PREMACHANDRA PRABHU, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.14273 of 2020
2
JUDGMENT
The complaint of the petitioner is that he is not granted the benefit of MCLR rate in respect of repayment of his housing loan availed in the year 2008.
2. It is stated that even though he approached the Ombudsman, the same was not considered.
3. I heard the learned Standing Counsel Sri. S.B.Premachandra Prabhu for the 1st respondent, according to whom the petitioner ought to have claimed the benefit MCLR submitting a
representation.
Therefore, petitioner would be free to submit a representation before the Bank raising his claim. On receipt of such representation, the 1st respondent Bank shall consider the same and take appropriate decision on the request of petitioner for the benefit of MCLR, within a period of one
month from the date of receipt of the
W.P.(C) No.14273 of 2020
3
representation along with the copy of the judgment. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/P.V.ASHA JUDGE
ww
W.P.(C) No.14273 of 2020
4
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT P1 | THE COPY OF THE CREDIT SANCTION INTIMATION. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P2 | ANNEXURE 1 SHOWING THE TERMS OF SANCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CREDIT SANCTION INTIMATION. |
| EXHIBIT P3 | THE PETITIONER'S COMPLAINT WITH THE SENIOR MANAGER DATED 18TH NOVEMBER 2019. |
| EXHIBIT P4 | THE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED SENIOR MANAGER OF THE BANK DATED 05.02.2020. |
| EXHIBIT P5 | THE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT P6 | THE COPY OF THE REPLY OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 07.04.2020. |
| EXHIBIT P7 | THE COPY OF THE PRINTOUT TAKEN FROM THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT MCLR SHOWING THE CURRENT RATE OF INTEREST i.e., IN THE RANGE 6.70% - 7.45%. |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of Marginal Cost of Lending Rate (MCLR) for his housing loan.
Whether the petitioner approached the Banking Ombudsman effectively.
Narayana Prabu S.
P.H. Jyothylekshmi
Corporation Bank, Edappally Branch
Reserve Bank of India
Banking Ombudsman
P.V. Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
