- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Lawyer approaches Supreme Court for a direction to RBI for extension of moratorium till 31 December
A lawyer has approached the Supreme Court seeking a direction to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for extension of moratorium on repayment of term loans till 31 December, 2020 in the background of the financial and economic crisis faced by various sectors.The petitioner – Vishal Tiwari in his Public Interest Litigation (PIL) cited the difficulties faced by those in service sectors and...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
A lawyer has approached the Supreme Court seeking a direction to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for extension of moratorium on repayment of term loans till 31 December, 2020 in the background of the financial and economic crisis faced by various sectors.
The petitioner – Vishal Tiwari in his Public Interest Litigation (PIL) cited the difficulties faced by those in service sectors and lawyers. He was of the opinion that the current deadline of 31 August, 2020 is not enough considering the sectors reeling under financial crisis are not likely to come out of the same by then and therefore he prayed that the moratorium period be extended till 31 December, 2020.
In his petition he has stated that the financial crises in the service sector and the crises faced by lawyers as also those in the Transport and Tourist Industry would not be able to recover immediately and it will take time till these secors start functioning smoothly. Therefore in the public interest he asked the Supreme Court to direct the RBI to extend the moratorium and defer the loan Instalments till the year end.
The petitioner invoked Article 21 and the right to life and livelihood saying that a situation of this nature would be in violation of this fundamental right.
He also cited the financial distress faced by many of the lawyers due to the pandemic and the financial crisis faced by them as many people lost their jobs or source of income and are in dire situations. He further stated that the closing down of the physical hearings in Courts during the lockdown has also led to many lawyers finding themselves in a tough situation.
According to the PIL, lawyers might not be able to overcome the financial distress situation by August 31 as the Courts remains closed for physical hearings. In light of the same, if the Banks and lenders start demanding repayment of loans after 31 August, people will have to struggle to make ends meet considering there is no income to meet these demands for EMI payments.
The PIL sought a direction for the extension of moratorium till 31 December with the direction to all the banks to kindly adhere to the same and defer the EMI payment on term loans.