Banks free to restructure loans, but can't penalise borrowers availing moratorium benefit, SC told
New Delhi: Banks are free to restructure loans but they cannot penalise honest borrowers by charging interest on deferred EMI payments under the moratorium scheme during the COVID-19 pandemic, a petitioner opposing the move said in the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
A bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan, which commenced final hearing on a batch of pleas raising the issue of interest on instalments deferred under the scheme during the moratorium period, was told that paying interest on interest is a double whammy for borrowers.
Senior counsel Rajiv Dutta, appearing for the petitioner Gajendra Sharma who has taken home loan from a bank, assailed the accrual of interests on EMIs even during the moratorium period.
RBI came out with the scheme and we thought that we will be paying the EMI after the moratorium period and later we were told that compound interest would be charged and it will be double whammy for us as we will be paying interest on interest, Dutta told the bench.
They have given so much relief to banks and we are not given any relief in actual terms , he said, adding that there is no default on my (petitioner) part and we cannot be penalized for availing a scheme by being charged the interest on interest .
Dutta claimed that Reserve Bank of India (RBI) is a regulator and not an agent of banks and borrowers are being penalised during the COVID-19 times.
Now the government is saying that they will restructure the loans. You restructure but don't penalise the honest borrowers, he said.
Senior advocate C A Sundaram, appearing for Confederation of Real Estate Developers' Associations of India (CREDAI), told the bench that moratorium should be extended for at least six months.
If interest can't be waived, then please reduce it to a level on which banks pay their depositors, he said.
Sundaram referred to the August 6 circular of RBI which gave power to banks to decide on moratorium to industries.
The Centre and the RBI had Tuesday told the apex court that moratorium period on repayment of loans during the COVID-19 pandemic is extendable by two years and several steps have been taken to help the stressed sectors.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre and RBI, had said that the economy contracted by 23 per cent in the April-June quarter due to coronavirus-related lockdown and restrictions.
The Centre also told the top court that waiver of interest on deferred EMIs during the moratorium period would be against the basic canons of finance and unfair to those who repaid loans as per schedule.
RBI however come out with a scheme which provides for extension of moratorium for two years to certain stressed borrowers, the central government had informed the apex court.
The Ministry of Finance had filed an affidavit before the court which had asked the Centre and the RBI to review the move to charge interest on EMIs and interest on the interest during the moratorium period introduced under the scheme due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC asks Centre to consider amending law on terminating pregnancy of rape survivors
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Thursday took strong exception to a plea by AIIMS seeking to set aside its order allowing a 15-year-old girl to medically terminate her 30-week pregnancy, and asked the Centre to consider amending the law to permit rape survivors to terminate unwanted pregnancies even beyond 20 weeks.
The top court said when there is pregnancy due to rape, there should not be a time limit.
Law needs to be organic and in sync with evolving time, it stressed.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said this is a case of child rape and the survivor will have a lifelong scar and trauma if termination is not allowed.
The top court said if the mother does not have permanent disability then it should be carried out.
ALSO READ: Chlorine gas leaks at defunct water purification plant in Pune; 24 persons hospitalised
It asked AIIMS to counsel parents of the survivor over the issue and said the decision has to be of the person concerned.
"There are children for adoption. In this country we have lot of sympathies...There are deserted, abandoned children on the streets and even mafias on it. We have to look at them. This is an unwanted pregnancy of a 15-year-old child.
"This is a curative petition. Unwanted pregnancy cannot be thrusted on a person. Imagine she is a child. She should be studying now. But we want to make her a mother. Imagine the pain, the humiliation the child has suffered in this," the bench said.
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for AIIMS, mentioned the curative plea, and said the termination of pregnancy is not possible.
"It will be a live baby with severe deformities. Minor mother will have lifelong health issues and cannot reproduce. Minor mother will have lifelong health issues. This child can be given for adoption. It has been 30 weeks now. It is a viable life now," she said.
The top court said the decision on termination has to choice of the survivor and her parents and AIIMS may help them take an informed decision.
On April 24, a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan had allowed the girl to medically terminate her pregnancy of 30 weeks.
