File photo of Bombay High Court.
Credit: iStock Photo
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has held that a complaint by the Lilavati Hospital's trustee alleging that harassment by HDFC Bank led to the death of his father and the hospital's founder was an attempt to avoid payment of dues.
A division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande said filing the complaint before the state minorities commission was "nothing but an attempt to wriggle out of responsibilities".
The judgement was passed on September 18.
The court quashed the Commission's show cause notice to the HDFC Bank and its managing director and chief executive officer (CEO) in July this year, directing them to appear before it on August 1.
The Commission was hearing a complaint filed by Rajesh Mehta, permanent trustee of the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, which runs the Lilavati Hospital here, alleging severe harassment and mental torture by the senior management and recovery department of the bank to him and his father, Kishor Mehta.
The complainant claimed the bank was in collusion with certain erstwhile trustees of the hospital trust, and this harassment caused the death of Kishor Mehta on May 20, 2024.
He alleged that the senior management had kept the sword of arrest hanging over Kishor Mehta, which resulted in his untimely death.
The Mehtas belong to the minority Jain community.
The bank, in its plea in the high court, challenged the notice and refuted the allegations, saying the complaint before the Commission was filed only to circumvent the recovery proceedings it had initiated.
The court conceded and said the complaint filed by Rajesh Mehta was "nothing but an attempt to short-circuit the procedure adopted by the HDFC Bank against its borrowers and to face an action as a debtor, who was jointly and severally liable to pay an amount of Rs 14 crore".
"On the pretext that since he (Rajesh Mehta) is a member of the Jain community, he cannot knock on the doors of the Commission and get orders passed," the bench said.
The bench noted that if a liability of recovery of dues is fastened upon the complainant, he cannot take benefit of being a member of a minority community to wriggle out of the same.
It also said the Commission had acted beyond its jurisdiction by issuing notice to the bank.
The court, while quashing the show cause notice issued to the HDFC bank's managing director and CEO, said it was done so "without jurisdiction and was in violation of the principles of natural justice".
The court noted that the Commission is empowered to make recommendations to ensure effective implementation and enforcement of all safeguards provided in the Constitution, laws enacted by the Parliament and the state legislature and those contained in the policies and schemes for minorities.
The bench said it was "really doubtful" whether the provisions of the Maharashtra State Minorities Commission Act intended to cover an individual complaint like the present one.
In 2020, the recovery officer passed an order directing the civil imprisonment of Rajesh Mehta and Kishor Mehta, which the courts confirmed, and an arrest warrant was also issued in 2023 against Rajesh Mehta, it said.
It further noted that the Mehta family had filed 15 proceedings on the issue before a civil court, the high court and the Supreme Court.
"When Mr Mehta (Rajesh Mehta) was unable to taste success in either of the proceedings, to short circuit the payment of the amount due under the recovery certificate and to avoid arrest, the present complaint was filed before the Minorities Commission," the high court said.
The court also restrained the Commission from proceeding with the complaint by summoning the petitioners (bank).