Ask a Question - Free Legal Advice

Please advice if we do not need project approval under fema as no deferred payment terms are there, can we do Remittance under Construction Services: S0501: Construction of projects abroad by Indian companies including import of goods at project site abroad , for our vendor for purchase of material at client site

Dear sir i have received demand notice by legal associate to pay my dues within 7 days, how can reply them requesting to extend time for payment, please i request need to file a case against the bank for harrasing me collection of dues

A. U will need to send legal notice through lawyer

Sir how to respond to the demand notice sent by mail for non payment of credit card dues

Sir I have received mail as notice for non payment of credit card dues, credit card people have insulted me by visiting my house speaking with neighbours as i have borrowed money not paid , they threatened me by phone calls , will this notice by mail is valid There is any legal action can take against the bank people for harrasing me

This is regarding the final judgement given by the presiding officer DRT regarding the auction of the mortgaged property since the builder has not given the possession.In the order it is stated that any shortfall in the mortgaged property the amount shall be recovered from the builder and then borrower. Secondly in the order they have not attached the mortgaged property which is not in my name. Can i go to the consumer court or rera in this regard? Kindly advise.

A. I dont' feel the need of going to the court.

My father was a pensioner and he passed away recently. We received a notice from a bank to pay an outstanding loan for 3lakhs which was sanctioned in 2014 and was not paid from 2017 as per the letter. None of the legal family members are aware of this. We don't know how a loan can be sanctioned to a pensioner of 75 years without the family concern. Please advice ....

A. Dear Sir, Usually such loans are insured as such you did not pay. Secondly such personal loans cannot be sanctioned and claim waive off. Thirdly the said amount not used for his legal heirs as such you are not bound to pay the same. Ask them to approach Civil Court then you engage advocate and take strong defence.

i have a Insta Jumbo Loan from HDFC Bank Credit Card since Dec 2016 with EMI of Rs. 7398.79 which being auto debited on 24th of every month, but due to sudden crisis i was not able to pay my April EMI, As a result they freeze by Savings Bank account for 5 days of this month, for that my LIC ECS was bounced instead having balance in my savings account. After that I had written a letter to the bank authority that why they did this without informing me and i have stopped my next ECS also. They called me several time and i asked them please reply my letter. They did not reply me till date and now they served me the Demand Notice under Sec 25 of Payment and settlement act. I can’t understand what should i do? Please advice. Thanks Sanjib Roy

A. Dear Sir, It attracts offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act treating it as equivalent to cheque bounce. The amended act is as follows: ============================================================================== Section 25 in The Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 25 Dishonour of Electronic Funds Transfer for insufficiency, etc., of funds in the account. — (1) Where an electronic funds transfer initiated by a person from an account maintained by him cannot be executed on the ground that the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the transfer instruction or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with a bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall, without prejudice to any other provisions of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may be extended to two years, or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the electronic funds transfer, or with both: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless— (a) the electronic funds transfer was initiated for payment of any amount of money to another person for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt on other liability; (b) the electronic funds transfer was initiated in accordance with the relevant procedural guidelines issued by the system provider; (c) the beneficiary makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing to the person initiating the electronic funds transfer within thirty days of the receipt of information by him from the bank concerned regarding the dishonour of the electronic funds transfer; and (d) the person initiating the electronic funds transfer fails to make the payment of the said money to the beneficiary within fifteen days of the receipt of the said notice. (2) It shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that the electronic funds transfer was initiated for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability. (3) It shall not be a defence in a prosecution for an offence under sub-section (1) that the person, who initiated the electronic funds transfer through an instruction, authorization, order or agreement, did not have reason to believe at the time of such instruction, authorization, order or agreement that the credit of his account is insufficient to effect the electronic funds transfer. (4) The Court shall, in respect of every proceeding under this section, on production of a communication from the bank denoting the dishonour of electronic funds transfer, presume the fact of dishonour of such electronic funds transfer, unless and until such fact is disproved. (5) The provisions of Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881) shall apply to the dishonour of electronic funds transfer to the extent the circumstances admit. Explanation. —For the purpose of this section, “debt or other liability” means a legally enforceable debt or other liability, as the case may be.

Does police involve for non payment for credit card dues, executive calls & threatens police will come with warrant to arrest

A. Dear Sir, It is purely a civil case. The police cannot help the bankers or their money recovery agents. A legal notice is sufficient. ====================================================================== ICCI Bank Limited vs. Prakash Kaur case, The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement reiterated its earlier stand that banks cannot deploy musclemen for recovery of loans from defaulters thus forcing them to end their lives. "We deem it appropriate to remind the banks and other financial institutions that we live in a civilised country and are governed by the rule of law," a bench comprising Justices Tarun Chatterjee and Dalveer Bhandari said. The court while dismissing the ICICI Bank's plea refused to delete the Delhi High Court's remarks that held the bank and its musclemen responsible for abetting a youth to commit suicide by humiliating him and taking away his motorcycle financed by the largest private sector bank. It also asked the ICICI Bank to to pay Rs 25,000 as cost of this litigation to the respondents within three weeks and directed the Delhi Police to conclude the investigation against the bank expeditiously within three months, keeping in view the gravity of the allegations. The court also directed the concerned Deputy Commissioner of Police to submit the investigation report in the Delhi High Court. According to the court, complaints received by Reserve Bank regarding violation of the above guidelines and adoption of abusive practices followed by banks recovery agents would be viewed seriously. Reiterating the RBI Guidelines on Engagement of Recovery Agents, the court said, "The Reserve Bank may consider imposing a ban on a bank from engaging recovery agents in a particular area, either jurisdictional or functional, for a limited period. In case of persistent breach of above guidelines, Reserve Bank may consider extending the period of ban or the area of ban." "RBI had expressed its concern about the number of litigations filed against the banks in the recent past for engaging recovery agents who have purportedly violated the law," Justice Bhandari, writing the verdict for the bench, stated. RBI in a letter accompanying its April 24, 2008 Guidelines had stated that it might consider imposing a ban on a bank from engaging recovery agents in a particular area, either jurisdictional or functional, for a limited period. ICICI Bank had moved the apex court seeking deletion of some paragraphs in the High Court order which had said that "...the proximate cause of death of the deceased that led him to commit suicide was on account of humiliation caused by the Bank people from where loan was taken by him." "The modus-operandi employed by the banks like ICICI for realisation of their loan amount and for recovering the possession of the vehicle against which loans are given is extra legal and by no stretch of imagination they can be permitted to employ musclemen and goons for recovery of their dues even from a defaulting party," the High Court had observed. The High Court order had come on a petition filed by Shanti Devi Sharma, the deceased's mother, seeking a probe against the ICICI bank and its staff for the unlawful action, which led to the suicide of her 34-year old son Himanshu Dev Sharma. Sharma had committed suicide in October 2005 by hanging himself at his house after he was allegedly intimidated and humiliated in front of his neighbours and family by recovery agents employed by the bank for recovering the loan amount taken for his motorcycle. The ICICI Bank had contended that it was within its rights to recover loans and had followed the required procedure for recovering dues.

I am the proprietor of start up business valued around Rs 2 Crores and I am aged around 71 years without any liabilities from any bank. Now, one of our family friends requests me to be the SECOND GUARANTOR for Rs 15 Crores of Business loan sanctioned against his own property valued around Rs 60 Crores.Already one more guarantor is available. I do not have any assets on my name. The property intended to give as security does not have Patta but funding company has not raised any objection.Whats is the risk involved to be a second Guarantor. The lender offers Rs 25 Lakhs as interest free loan and Rs 40 lakhs loan with interest of 18 % for my business. Could you please advise whether , I can be a second Guarantor.

A. If you become the second guarantor then you shall be liable to repay the loan after the failures of the borrower and 1st Guarantor. Eg: if both of them are unable to repay then you shall be liable to repay the whole amount. Eg 2 : If both of them pay parts of the loan amount then you shall be liable to pay t he remaining part which is not yet paid. Thanks

My father had a stroke 2 weeks back.and he has home loan.so i want to claim insurance for home loan.so please give some advice how to do.and what are the process.please tell in depth.so i can approach

A. I shall need to study the policy documents before advising. Please consult me so that I can give you good advise.