Allowed

Kirankumar Moolchand Jain v. TransUnion Cibil Ltd. and 2 others

Madras HC26 Aug 2021OA/485/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court granted an interim injunction against TransUnion CIBIL Ltd. to stop publishing incorrect credit data about the petitioner. The court found a prima facie case as details regarding a loan prior to a bank guarantee were inaccurately reported as a default. The petitioner was directed to initiate arbitration within 90 days.

What did the court decide?

Interim injunction restraining 1st Respondent (CIBIL) from publishing incorrect credit rating data; petitioner directed to invoke arbitration within 90 days.

Kirankumar Moolchand Jain Vs TransUnion Cibil Ltd. and 2… — Consumer Protection | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

O.A.No. 485 of 2021

¶7

In the matter of Arbitration & conciliation Act 1996. and In the matter of dispute between Kirankumar Moolchand Jain and TransUnion CIBIL Ltd. & The Cosmos Co-operative Bank Ltd. And (Statutory Arbitration under section 18 Credit Information Companies (Regulation) Act, 2005)

¶8

Mr.Kirankumar Moolchand Jain, 15, Ragavaiah Road, 3A, Kenses Flats, 2^nd Floor, T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017.

¶9

. . . Petitioner

¶10

Versus

¶11

TransUnion CIBIL Ltd., Formerly : Credit Information Bureau [India] Ltd., One Indiabulls Centre, Tower 2A, 19^th Floor, Senapati Bapat Mart, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400 013.

¶12

The Cosmos Co-operative Bank Ltd., Represented by its Authorised Signatory,

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ General manager, Mr.Sanjay S.Sawant, Having registered Office at 6, ICS Colony, University Road, Ganeshkhind

¶14

¶15

Shivaji Nagar, Pune – 411 007.

¶16

Reserve Bank of India, Rep. by its Regional Director, Fort Glacis, 16, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001. . . . Respondents

¶17

Original Petition praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to

¶18

pass an order of Interim Injunction restraining the 1st Respondent from continuing to publish the incorrect credit rating information data pertaining to the Applicant.

¶19

This Original Application coming on this day before this court for hearing in the presence of Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, Senior Counsel for Mr.Akhil R.Bhansali, Advocate for the Applicant herein and Mr.Varun Srinivasan for M/s.NVS Associates, Advocates for the 2^nd respondent herein and the respondents 1 & 3 herein not appearing in person or by advocate and upon reading the Judge's Summons and the affidavit of Kirankumar Moolchand Jain filed herein and, it is ordered as follows:-

¶20

That TransUnion CIBIL Ltd., formerly : Credit Information Bureau [India] Ltd., the 1^st respondent herein be and is hereby restrained by an order of interim injunction from continuing to publish incorrect credit rating information data pertaining to the applicant.

¶21

That the applicant herein shall invoke arbitration proceedings https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ within a period of 90 days.

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶23

¶24

That this O.A.No.485 of 2021 do stand closed.

¶25

WITNESS THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT AT MADRAS AFORESAID, THIS THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021.

¶26

Sd/ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (Comm. Cases) //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

¶27

COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

¶28

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

EVK 07/09/2021

O.A.No. 485 of 2021

ORDER

DATED : 26.08.2021

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶35

FOR APPROVAL: 08/09/2021

¶36

APPROVED ON: 13/09/2021

¶37

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶38

¶39

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶40

Date 26.08.2021

¶41

CORAM:

¶42

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

¶43

O.A.No.485 of 2021

¶44

Mr.Kirankumar Moolchand Jain . . . Petitioner

¶45

Versus

¶46

TransUnion CIBIL Ltd., Formerly : Credit Information Bureau [India] Ltd., One Indiabulls Centre, Tower 2A, 19^th Floor, Senapati Bapat Mart, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400 013.

¶47

The Cosmos Co-operative Bank Ltd., Represented by its Authorised Signatory, General manager, Mr.Sanjay S.Sawant, Having registered Office at 6, ICS Colony, University Road, Ganeshkhind Shivaji Nagar, Pune – 411 007.

¶48

Reserve Bank of India, Rep. by its Regional Director, Fort Glacis, 16, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001. . . . Respondents

¶49

PRAYER : Petition filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of the O.S.Rules and Read with Section 9[d] of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for interim injunction restraining the 1^st respondent from continuing to publish the incorrect credit rating information data pertaining to the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Applicant.

¶50

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶51

6 For petitioner : Mr.ARL Sundaresan, SC for Mr.Akhil R.Bhansali For respondents : No appearance – R1 & R3 Mr.Varun Srnivasan for NVS Associates – R2

¶52

O R D E R

¶53

This application has been filed for interim injunction as against the first respondent restraining them from continuing to publish incorrect credit rating information data pertaining to the Applicant.

¶54

Notice has been served on the first respondent. Despite the

¶55

same, none appeared for the first respondent.

¶56

The main contention of the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant is that the petitioner has given bank guarantee on 02.03.2016. However, after such guarantee, no amount whatsoever has been disbursed in favour of the principal borrower. As far as the applicant is concerned, CIBIL ratings is always good. Such being the matter, the first respondent, without proper verification, has furnished https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ incorrect details in the CIBIL ratings for the loan said to have been

¶57

¶58

disbursed on 04.08.2014, i.e., much prior to the date of bank guarantee

¶59

executed by the applicant herein in favour of the bank. Therefore, it is the contention of the learned Senior Counsel that since the applicant is maintaining very good account rating and there is no default committed by the applicant and due to incorrect particulars furnished by the first respondent, there is serious impact on business of the applicant and it would cause serious and irreparable injury to the applicant.

¶60

On a perusal of the materials, as rightly pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant, it is seen that the guarantee itself is executed on 02.03.2016 and the loan borrowed by the principal borrower was on 04.08.2014, for which the applicants' account is shown as a defaulter, that itself indicate that the first respondent has

¶61

not verified the accounts properly and casually furnished the details.

¶62

Having regard to the above facts, particularly CIBIL ratings of the applicant is good, but the incorrect particulars furnished by the first respondent, this Court is satisfied that the applicant has made out prima facie case and balance of convenience is also in favour of the applicant

¶63

and if the interim injunction is not granted, the applicant will put it https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ irreparable loss, there shall be an Order of interim injunction as against

¶64

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶65

¶66

the first respondent from continuing to publish incorrect credit rating

¶67

information data pertaining to the Applicant.

¶68

The applicant shall invoke arbitration proceedings within a

¶69

period of 90 days.

¶70

With the above direction, this Original Application is closed.

¶71

Sd./-N.S.K.J. 26.08.2021

¶72

//Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

¶73

COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

¶74

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Kirankumar Moolchand Jain v. TransUnion Cibil Ltd. and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kirankumar Moolchand Jain v. TransUnion Cibil Ltd. and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd. Vs M/S.Chirayu Tours Booking Office

Mary Rajasekaran, Vs University of Madras

T.Ravichandran, S/o. M.Thangavel, Vs Mrs.Parimala Raju, W/o. Kalaignar Thangaraju

M/s.International Waste Management Pvt. Rep.by its authorised signatory Mr.Manoj Batra, Ltd., Vs M/s. Sara Plast Pvt. Ltd., Rep.by its authorised signatory

Mr.Kumar Royadurgam, S/o. Mr.Srinivasa Tatachariar, Vs M/s.Green Tree Homes and Ventures Private Ltd.

mr.v.Madhava Rao, s/o. mr.laksman rao, Vs M/s.Green Tree Homes and Ventures Private Ltd.