1 2025:CGHC:50807 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 5341 of 2025 Saira Khan W/o Shahid Khan Aged About 49 Years R/o Noorani Chowk, Govind Nagar, Raja Talab, Raipur, District- Raipur, ( C.G. ). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Bandhan Bank Limited Through- Athourized Signatory, Head Office, 12-14, Adventz Infinity @ 5, Sector V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata ( West Bengal ) Pin- 700091 2 - Branch Manager Bank Limited, Pandri Branch, Second Floor, Bhatia Complex, Above Union Bank Of India, Pandri Road, Raipur, District- Raipur ( C.G. ). Pin- 492001 3 - Reserve Bank Of India Through- The Regional Officer, Regional Office, Subhanshish Parisar, Mahadev Ghat Road, Prem Vihar, Daganiya, Sunder Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur ( C.G. ) Pin- 492013 ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 13/10/2025 1. By way of this petition, petitioner sought following relief(s) : VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.10.15 10:45:09 +0530 2 “10.1 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or direction quashing the revised EMI, interest rate and extended tenure as reflected in the Bank statement dated 23.07.2025 (Annexure P-2). 10.2 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Bank to reinstate the original interest rate (11.65%), EMI (Rs.16,921/-) and tenure (20 years). 10.3 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to restrain the respondent Bank from making additional unilateral changes to the loan terms without prior notice and consent. 10.4 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to award compensation for the financial burden and mental distress caused by the respondent Banks’s actions and further be pleased to grant costs incurred by the petitioner in pursuing this matter. 10.5 That, any appropriate writ, direction or order may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition before this Hon ble Court challenging the arbitrary act of the respondent Bandhan Bank which increased the interest rate, raised the EMI and extended the tenure to 30 years of the home loan without prior notice. These changes are arbitrary, lack transparency, and violate banking regulations, causing financial and emotional distress. The petitioner availed a home loan of Rs. 14,00,000/- from Bandhan Bank, Pandri Branch, sanctioned on 31.12.2015, with a 20-year tenure, an interest rate of 11.65%, and a monthly EMI of Rs. 16,921/-. The 3 petitioner consistently paid the EMI, except for an overdue amount of Rs. 50,300.18 during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was cleared on 01.03.2023. However, the bank unilaterally increased the interest rate, raised the EMI to Rs. 18,292/-, and extended the loan tenure to 30 years without prior notice, as reflected in the bank statement dated 23.07.2025. Despite a legal notice sent on 28.08.2025, the bank's response on 12.09.2025 did not address the petitioner's grievances. The petitioner seeks redressal for the unilateral changes, alleging violation of applicable rules, financial burden, and mental distress. The case pertains to a home loan dispute between the petitioner and Bandhan Bank. The petitioner, a diligent borrower, complied with all loan terms, including clearing an overdue amount caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite this, the bank altered the loan terms without notice, increasing the interest rate, EMI, and tenure. The petitioner contends that these changes are arbitrary, lack transparency, and violate banking regulations, causing financial and emotional distress. A legal notice was issued, but the bank's response was inadequate. The petitioner seeks restoration of the original loan terms, compensation, and interim relief to prevent further financial strain. 3. Considering the matter in its entirety, this Court is of the opinion that since the remedy available to the petitioner to file appropriate application/complaint before the concerned Banking Ombudsman, at this stage, it would be appropriate that a direction be given to the 4 petitioner to pursue the remedy before the Banking Ombudsman and the concerned Banking Ombudsman, who is in receipt the copies of the complaints is directed to consider the case of the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders while considering the matter on merits in accordance with law. 4. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to file appropriate application/complaint for grant of interim relief before respondent No.3 i.e. Banking Ombudsman, Reserve Bank of India, within a period of 15 days from today and, in turn the Banking Ombudsman concerned is directed to consider the said application and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. 5. With the aforesaid observation/direction, instant petition stands disposed rights and contentions of the parties are left open. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant