Disposed

L.Mathavan v. The Honourable Ombudsman

Madras HC20 Dec 2021WP/27102/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed under Article 226 directing the Reserve Bank Ombudsman to act on a consumer complaint against ICICI Bank's recovery team for alleged harassment and lack of transparency in loan collection.

What did the court decide?

The Ombudsman is directed to consider the Petitioner's complaint dated 06.10.2021 in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties as expeditiou

L.Mathavan Vs The Honourable Ombudsman — Consumer Protection | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 20.12.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.27102 OF 2021

¶6

L.Mathavan ... Petitioner

¶7

.Vs.

¶8

The Honourable Ombudsman, C/o.Reserve Bank of India, Fort Glacis, Chennai - 600 001.

¶9

The Manager, ICICI Bank Limited, Arihant Insight, Ambattur, Ambattur Industrial Estate, Chennai - 600 058. ... Respondents

¶10

PRAYER:-

¶11

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st Respondent to take action against the 2^nd Respondent to follow the due process of law, regarding collection of loan amount as guided by Reserve Bank of India, forthwith the Petitioner's complaint dated 06.10.2021.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Govindarajan

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

Petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition seeking a direction to the 1^st Respondent to take action against the 2^nd Respondent to follow the due process of law, regarding collection of loan amount as per the guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India, based on his complaint, dated 06.10.2021.

¶15

According to the Petitioner, he obtained personal loan from the 2^nd Respondent/Bank to the tune of Rs.4,70,000/- and he repaid a sum of Rs.2,55,220/- to the 2^nd Respondent. However,

¶16

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

¶17

the recovery team of the 2^nd Respondent persistently insisted the Petitioner to settle the abnormal arrears of Rs.3,83,061/without furnishing proper details. When the Petitioner questioned the 2^nd Respondent/Bank as regards computation of the said amount, the recovery team of the 2^nd Respondent/Bank came to the Petitioner's house with rowdy elements, used unparliamentary words against him and his family members and threatened him with dire consequences. Aggrieved over the same, the Petitioner sent a complaint dated 06.10.2021 to the 1^st Respondent. As no action is taken on his complaint, having no other alternative, the Petitioner is before this Court.

¶18

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that, a direction may be issued to the 1^st Respondent herein to dispose of the Petitioner's complaint dated 06.10.2021 in accordance with law, within a stipulated time.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material documents available on record.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into its merits, as there is no adverse order against the 2^nd Respondent herein, this Court directs the 1^st Respondent herein to consider the Petitioner's complaint dated 06.10.2021 in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties, as expeditiously as possible.

¶21

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar(CS VII)

¶24

//True Copy//

¶25

Sub Assistant Registrar

(aeb)

The Ombudsman,

C/o. Reserve Bank of India, Fort Glacis, Chennai - 600 001.

¶30

W.P.NO.27102 OF 2021

¶31

SMI(CO) PBS/06/01/2022

¶32

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

L.Mathavan v. The Honourable Ombudsman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.Mathavan v. The Honourable Ombudsman

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.P.M.R.Ganesh Pandian Vs The Regional officer

Hameed Basha Vs M.Govinda Rao IAS

K.Lakshmanan Vs State Rep by

Sithi Hassan Beevi Vs The Chairman and Managing Director

B.Senthil Vs The Assistant Engineer

D.Vimala Devi Vs The Chairman and Managing