Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. In all these petitions, the reliefs claimed are almost similar except for small variations. The dominant relief claimed is to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus/certiorari or any other writ directing the respondent banks/financial institutions not to charge the pre-EMIs or full EMIs from the petitioners/alike homebuyers. It is also prayed that the respondent banks/financial institutions be directed not to charge the pre-EMIs/full EMIs till the possession is not delivered by the respondents builder/alike real estate developers to the petitioners with respect to their respective flats. For the sake of clarity prayer clause from the lead writ petition i.e. W.P. (C) 9491/2020 is being reproduced as under: -

banks/financial institutions. The home loans were availed by the members of the petitioner association on the basis of subvention schemes, whereby, the respondents-banks/financial institutions would disburse the sanctioned amount to the respondent-builder directly and the respondent-builder was supposed to pay the pre-EMIs or full EMIs on the sanctioned loan. The separate agreements were executed between the members of the petitioner-association and the respondents-banks/financial institutions. As per the terms and conditions of respective agreements, the builder paid pre-EMIs or full EMIs to the respective respondent-banks/financial institutions. However, around December, 2018, the builder started defaulting in payments of the pre-EMIs or full EMIs and the respondent-

association to honour all the EMIs as well as pre-EMIs of the loan

- 30 - Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:1872 advanced. It is stated that respondent No. 6-PNBHFL has funded 144 customers in the project „Supertech Azalia‟ and 50 customers in the project „Supertech Hues‟. It is stated that there is no element of State involvement in the matter and the issue is purely private in nature. The relationship between respondent No. 6-PNBHFL and its customers rests on respective loan agreements and is completely contractual in nature. Various terms and conditions of the loan documents have been relied upon to indicate that the parties are bound by the terms and conditions of the respective agreements. According to respondent No. 6-PNBHFL, as per tripartite agreement, the respondent-builder had assumed the liability of the members of petitioner-association to the limited extent of payment of pre-EMIs only for a certain period of months from the date of first disbursement or till possession/completion of the flat, whichever was earlier. It is stated that such liability of the builder has in no way, relinquished or reduced the liability of the members of the petitioner-association towards respondent No. 6-PNBHFL to repay the borrowed amount. It is stated that the obligation to repay the loan/EMI including the pre- EMI is a distinct and independent obligation of the borrower.

(i) To direct the respondent-banks/financial institutions not to charge the pre-EMIs or full EMIs from the petitioners homebuyers.

(ii) To direct the respondent-banks/financial institutions not to charge all the pre-EMIs or full EMIs till the possession is not delivered from the respondent builder/real estate developers.

(iii) To direct the respondent-banks/financial institutions to refund the petitioners' pre-EMIs or full EMIs paid by them.