<< 𝙇𝙀𝙖𝙣 π™ˆπ™€π™§π™–π™©π™€π™§π™žπ™ͺ𝙒 & π™„π™£π™©π™šπ™§π™šπ™¨π™© π™’π™–π™žπ™«π™šπ™§ >>

#SupremeCourt bench led by Justice Ashok will today take up plea(s) seeking extension of loan moratorium owing to the pandemic alongwith sector-specific plea’s.

@RBI
#loan
#loanmoratorium #ExtendMoratorium

Senior Advocate Ravindra Srivastava is making rejoinder submissions.
He says that no authority seems to be looking into the grievances of the borrowers.
Srivastava : Govt and RBI have come up with measures - for small borrowers (for loans up to 2 crores) on which I made submissions regarding discrimination.
They have shown nothing on record to prove why this was done, Srivastava says
Srivastava says that the intervention application of the IBA and the SBI circulars have been signed by the Deputy Managing Director but nowhere it has been stipulated to be a Board Approved policy.
Interest over interest is also stipulated in the Circulars which means that borrowers will have to pay a penalty for taking moratorium, says Srivastava
He adds that he is unable to understand how the RBI is holding the borrowers hands with the present policy stipulations.
26 sectors severely impacted by disaster, Kamath Committee has recognised these sectors, says Srivastava
This is a case where the National Disaster Management Authority should have come out, instead of handing over to the banks.
Srivastava: There has to be a solution to this, the power cannot ve left to the banks. Instead the RBI should be making provisions for resolution of the processes.
Bench says it will re-assemble at 2 PM.
Bench re-assembles.
Srivastava continues his rejoinder submissions.
Srivastava: Invocation stipulates a last date. Prudential norms never have a cut off date.

β€œBut there has to be a cut off date. Otherwise how will there be invocation?” Justice Reddy asks
But this is catastrophic especially in light of the Covid stress., says Srivastava
Srivastava: NDMA has to collect empirical data and make a comprehensive policy, not arguing that there needs to be a complete waiver. There can be a partial waiver also but for this there is a need for a calibrated policy under the Disaster Management Act
Srivastava: The DMA structure as argued by Mr Salve has demolished the architecture of the DMA, with due respect. His argument has made provisions of the DMA nugatory.
Relief can be granted for loans. In policy making, national authority has to apply its mind (under Disaster Management Act) but that has not been done.
Srivastava: Not practice of My lords to rely on Articles, but I have enclosed some articles wherein one financial expert has demonstrated how the waiver of compound interest works.
Srivastava: Absolute distress prevailing at the moment. They have not been taken into account, with due regard to the Union or RBI. Huge profits being made by banks.
Srivastava concludes.
Adv Vishal Tiwari: Pursuant to Order of your lordships, I went to to making a representation. One lending institution has written to me stating that (PNB Housing) the RBI Advisory is not applicable to me.

More from Live Law

More from Court

1) God bless the State of Texas and @KenPaxtonTX What he has just done gives us every chance to save our Republic and our country.

Keep in mind that there are only a few instances where a party can file a direct lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court, a state claiming harm by

2) another state is one of those instances.

https://t.co/xvXGDdgDYh

Texas Attorney General @KenPaxtonTX has filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court seeking and emergency injunction against Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia β€œfrom taking action to


3) certify presidential electors or to have such electors take any official action including without limitation participating in the electoral college.”

@KenPaxtonTX argues that arbitrary changes made by the state’s governors, secretaries of states and election supervisors were

4) β€œinconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures. The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.”

The lawsuit states: β€œthese non-legislative changes … facilitated the casting

5) and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution.” […] β€œBy these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens vote, but
Zojuist procesverbaal zittingen in deze verkrachtingszaak gekregen. Zeg, @HofDenBosch, jullie LIEGEN echt alles bij elkaar in deze zaak en hebben ook doelbewust uit stukken gelaten dat ik de Nederlandse overheid verantwoordelijk hield voor het ontstaan van deze tweede zaak! 1/ https://t.co/M5KfflDkFJ


Wat ik onder anderen gezegd heb ter zitting?

"Deze tweede zaak kon ALLEEN gebeuren omdat in de eerste zaak geweigerd werd getuigen te horen. Vervolgens is deze getuige mij gaan bedreigen en chanteren. Meerdere politiemeldingen, politie deed NIETS" 2/

@HofDenBosch


"Uiteindelijk kon door het FALEN van de Nederlandse overheid deze getuige mij van mijn vrijheid beroven en heeft hij mij verkracht"

Dat laten jullie natuurlijk weer uit het procesverbaal @HofDenBosch!

Er is ook met geen woord gerept over een 'klacht over politieoptreden' betreffende deze tweede zaak, tijdens de zitting! De AG haalde de verkrachtingszaak uit het niets aan, niet een klacht over politieoptreden betreffende de tweede zaak!


Er was op dat moment nog niet eens aangifte gedaan in de tweede zaak, maar om de een of andere reden wist de AG al dat ik een intake gesprek had gehad! Ik heb de @politie gesproken (opgenomen gesprek), die begrepen OOK niet hoe de AG dat kon weten!

You May Also Like