Principle Of Promissory Estoppel Applies After Customer Acts On Basis Of Bank’s One Time Settlement Scheme: Gujarat High Court

Principle Of Promissory Estoppel Applies After Customer Acts On Basis Of Bank’s One Time Settlement Scheme

Case: Ms Harekrushna Infra Projects Pvt Ltd & 1 Other(S) Vs State Bank Of India

Coram: Honourable Mr. Justice Biren Vaishnav

Case No.: C/SCA/9069/2021

Court Observation: “It is clear that the principle of promissory estoppel applies. The bank by its conduct of offering an OTS settlement intended to create egal relations which the petitioners had acted upon in light of the promise made and paid the amount on or before 30th of December 2017. This action was apparently accepted in principle by the bank as not only for the title clearance certificate but valuation reports letters were written by by the bank to the advocates and the valuers. The amounts were paid and accepted by the bank and once the petitioners had acted upon on the promise set out by the bank, the bank cannot be allowed to go back on its proposal on the basis of a letter dated 28th August 2018 stating that the scheme of OTS was not applicable as the cases of the petitioners was reported as fraud.”

“The act on behalf of the bank therefore in not releasing the title documents, not issuing of a no due certificate and not withdrawing the pending legal actions against the petitioners is arbitrary and violates the constitutional guarantee enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Central Bank of India versus Devi Ispat (2010) 11 SCC 186.”

“When the entire amount was paid pursuant to the OTS settlement, the bank could not have cancelled the settlement vide its letter dated 28.08.2018 stating that as the case of the petitioners was reported as fraud, the petitioners were not entitled to the benefits of ATS. In light of the decision in the case of Lotus Hotel (Supra), it is clear that the principle of promissory estoppel applies.”

Previous Posts

Drugs & Cosmetics Act: Complainant Must Prove “Exclusive Possession” Of Premises By Accused From Where Recovery Is Made: Telangana High Court

Licence Under Places Of Public Resort Act Is Compulsory To Run A Gym: Kerala High Court

Hindu Marriage Act: Able-Bodied Husband Having Earning Capacity Can’t Seek Permanent Alimony From Wife: Karnataka High Court

Only God Can Save These Types Of Lawyers: Kerala High Court After Advocate Argues Against Interest Of His Client

Employment Conditions Can’t Take Away Employees’ Right To Seek Judicial Review Of Employer’s Actions: J&K&L High Court

Section 8 Application Should Be Filed Within Time Available For Filing Written Statement: Delhi High Court

Married Woman Wilfully Cohabitating With Another Man Can’t Prosecute Him For Rape Under False Promise Of Marriage: Telangana High Court

S.354 IPC Not Attracted If Woman Herself Didn’t Perceive The Act Of ‘Catching Hold Of Her Hand’ As Invading Her Decency: Telangana High Court

Pre-Condition Of Filing Complaint U/S 138 NI Act Not Fulfilled When Statutory Notice Of Demand Sent On Wrong Address: J&K&L High Court

Person Who Secures Appointment On The Basis Of A False Caste Certificate Cannot Be Permitted To Retain Benefit Of Wrongful Appointment: Supreme Court

Appeal Against Environmental Clearance Granted to Vishakapatnam Greenfield International Airport Restored By Supreme Court Before NGT Download Judgement