Last Updated on March 27, 2024 by News Desk
A concern was raised by the Bombay HC, that there has been a rise in the cases where the borrowers have been taking the law into their hands, which was strongly discouraged by the division bench of Justice BP Colabawalla and Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan.
The observation was made by the court that in the case at hand, three borrowers had allegedly tried to bypass the orders of the court where they pressurized the nonbanking finance company against parting the party, though the court had already ordered the handover of the property.
A show cause notice was issued to the borrower, to explain the contempt action.
On 13th March the order was given by the court to hand over the property and the borrowers said that they would do the same. However, on 21st March, the auction purchaser approached the HC with the apprehension that even though the possession had been given to the NBFC, the successful possession to the purchaser might not take place.
The Court was informed about a letter from borrowers to the NBFC, stating they handed over the secured asset with the condition that NBFC wouldn’t transfer possession. NBFC denied agreeing to this condition, as it wasn’t in the Court’s order. Despite previous handovers, borrowers trespassed by breaking locks, leading to an FIR.
The Court then directed the borrowers and their lawyers to appear in court to provide explanations as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against the borrowers for attempting to defy court orders.
Case Title:- Cholamandalam Investment Finance Company Ltd v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Written By:- Shianjany Pradhan (@SHIANJANYPRADHAN)
