Prayagraj, May 29: Allahabad High Court has directed the Chairman of ICICI Bank to personally explain how the bank officials took the services of recovery agents in the loan case despite the ban imposed by the Supreme Court.
Hearing the petition filed by ICICI Bank officer Jasminder Chahal and three others, Justice Prashant Kumar said, “ICICI Bank officials were well aware of the fact that they cannot appoint any recovery agents and yet they took the services of recovery agents in the year 2013, which is six years after the decision was passed by the Supreme Court.”
In the case of ICICI Bank Ltd. vs. Prakash Kaur (2007) 2 SCC 711, the Supreme Court had clearly stated that the bank will not use the services of recovery agents to recover the loan and they will have to follow the procedure prescribed under the law. Since the chairman of ICICI was not a party to the petition filed under section 482 (inherent powers of the High Court), the court allowed the applicants to implead him in the petition.
As per the facts of the case, a person named Rahul Singh had taken a loan and later paid the entire loan amount along with interest. Despite making full payment, ICICI showed him as a defaulter, as a result of which he failed to get further loan or financial assistance. This hampered his business.
Further, ICICI filed a civil suit against the borrower in Kanpur Nagar and used recovery agents, who according to the respondent (borrower) reached his ancestral house when he was in the US.
According to him, the recovery agents made derogatory remarks and maligned his image in the society. Therefore, aggrieved by this, the respondent- Rahul Singh filed a criminal complaint in the Kanpur Nagar Court. In this, summons were issued to ICICI officials. In pursuance of this summons order, ICICI officials filed the present petition before the High Court seeking a stay on the entire proceedings going on against them.
After hearing both the parties, the court directed the Chairman of ICICI Bank to explain how a civil suit was filed against complainant Rahul Singh. Especially when the entire loan amount including interest and foreclosure charges was paid. Why was the complainant harassed. The Chairman was also directed to explain how his bank is still taking the services of recovery agents, even though the Supreme Court has clearly prohibited it. The court will hear this petition again on July 10, 2024.
