Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 3]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

Centre For Public Interest Litigation vs Housing And Urban Development ... on 16 February, 2016

Bench: Chief Justice, R. Banumathi, Uday Umesh Lalit

                                                    1


     ITEM NO.10                           COURT NO.1                 SECTION PIL(W)

                               S U P R E M E C O U R T O F        I N D I A
                                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Writ Petition(s)(Civil)              No(s).   573/2003

     CENTRAL FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION                           Petitioner(s)

                                                   VERSUS

     HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORP.LTD&ORS                         Respondent(s)
     (with office report)


     Date : 16/02/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                         HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                         HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT

     For Petitioner(s)             Mr. Prashant Bhushan,Adv.
                                   Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, Adv.


     For Respondent(s)             Mr.   Ranjit Kumar, SG,
                                   MS.   Binu Tamta, Adv.
                                   Mr.   D.L.Chidananda, Adv.
                                   Mr.   R.K.Verma, Adv.
                                   Mr.   D. S. Mahra,Adv.

                                   Mr.   Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv.
                                   MS.   Ruby Singh Ahuja, Adv.
                                   Mr.   Vishal Gehrana, Adv.
                                   Mr.   Milind Sharma, Adv.
                                   Mr.   Karan Dev Chopra, Adv.

                                   Mr. Kuldeep S.Parihar, Adv.
                                   Mr. H. S. Parihar,Adv.

                                    Mr. P. Parmeswaran,Adv.

                                    Mr. Pranab Kumar Mullick,Adv.
                                    MS. Soma Mullick, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
                                    Mr. Sebot Kumar Deuria, Adv.
Digitally signed by
Mahabir Singh
Date: 2016.02.17
10:24:21 IST
Reason:
                                    Mr. Rajeev Sharma,Adv.
                                    Ms. Radhalakshmi, Adv.
                                    Mr. Sahil Bhalaik, Adv.
                                               2

                            Mr. Varun Singh, Adv.
                            Mr. Vikas Mehta,Adv.


            UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                               O R D E R

Mr. Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioner has today filed a detailed note based on the averments made in the writ petition and Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) report submitted pursuant to the directions of this Court dated 29.08.2005. Certain additional documents are also filed to point out that the problem of advancing loans to undeserving borrowers is not confined only to HUDCO but extends to several other financial institutions including public sector banks. He submits by reference to a report published in “The Indian Express” that during the year 2015 loans advanced to private parties that were written off are in the range of nearly Rs. 40,000/- crores. From the same report, it appears that top ten banks have in the last three financial years written off loans of more than Rs. 80,000/- crores as bad debts. Mr. Bhushan submits that several of such defaulters owe huge amounts to the banks and financial institutions in excess of Rs. 500/- crores or so in each case. He further submits that in terms of 5/25 scheme for Corporate Debt Restructuring introduced by the Reserve Bank of India, many of these debts are being restructured by waiving of the interest due on the principal amount. He points out that according to his information debts of more than Rs. 3,00,000/- crores have been restructured over the past few years. He submits that keeping in 3 view the nature of the controversy in the present proceedings filed in public interest, Reserve Bank of India may be added as a party respondent to these proceedings and directions issued to it to place on record information relating to the defaulters in excess of Rs. 500/- crores including the details of borrowers whose debts of more than Rs. 500 crores have been restructured under the scheme afore-mentioned. We see no reason to decline that prayer. We accordingly add Reserve Bank of India through its Governor as party respondent No. 6. Mr. H.S.Parihar, Adv. who appears for the RBI in other matters is directed to accept notice and file an affidavit of a responsible officer of the Bank setting out the details of the debts and restructuring already done and extent of bad debts written off during the past five years.

Mr. Parihar submits that particulars of defaulters may not be accurately available with the Bank and even if it is available, the information may be confidential. In the circumstances, we direct that whatever information regarding bad debts is available with the RBI in regard to the debtors who are in default of payment of amounts more than Rs. 500/- crores shall be filed along with the affidavit in a sealed cover. Needful shall be done within six weeks.

Post after six weeks.

(Shashi Sareen)                                           (Veena Khera)
  AR-cum-PS                                               Court Master