1 2026:CGHC:22996 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5579 of 2024 1 - Saroj Bajpai W/o Shri Shailendra Bajpai, Aged About 54 Years R/o Bhatia Residency Mangla Road, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act 1956 With Registered Office At Ramon House, H.T. Parekh Marg, 169 Backbay Reclamation, Churchgate, Mumbai, Maharashtra, Pin Code 400020. 2 - Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited, Through Authorized Signatory, Office At Alaska Towers, Opp. Arogya Hospital, Lodhi Para Road, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited, Through The Branch Manager, Branch Rajeev Gandhi Chowk, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Hdfc Life Insurance Company Limited, Registered Office Lodha Excelus, 13th Floor, Apollo Mills Compound, N.M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai, Maharashtra. 5 - Insurance Regulatory And Development Authority Of India, Through Its Chairperson Head Office Sy. No. 115/1, Financial District, Nanakramguda, Hyderabad-500032. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Shailendra Kumar Bajpai, Advocate. For Respondent No.2 : Shri Devershi Thakur, Advocate For Respondent No.5 : Shri Anmol Varma and Shri Gajendra Sahu, Advocates. (Hon'ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge) Order on Board 14/05/2026 1. By way of this Writ Petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call the entire records of the case pertaining to the loan agreement availed by the petitioner. AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2026.05.18 18:41:28 +0530 2 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the impugned communication dated 31.05.2024 whereby the respondents have refused to clear the loan of the petitioner. 10.3 To grant any other relief which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 2. The necessary facts of the case are that the petitioner availed a housing loan from Respondent No.3 for purchase of a flat bearing Unit No. B-7, Om Zone, Phase-I, Mangla, Shubham Vihar, Bilaspur, vide Loan Account No. 655546053, for an amount of Rs.30,00,000/-, repayable in 180 monthly installments of Rs.26,798/- each. The loan agreement was executed on 10.11.2020. The petitioner had been regularly paying the monthly installments and, on several occasions, made excess payments with the intention of liquidating the loan well before the stipulated tenure. On 02.05.2024, the petitioner approached Respondent No.3 to make full and final payment of the outstanding amount and sought closure of the housing loan account. At that stage, for the first time, the petitioner was informed that he had allegedly availed two loans, one being the housing loan and another being an insurance loan bearing No. 656271515 for an amount of Rs.1,68,360/-, pertaining to Policy No. 1077627 and that the said amount had been remitted by the respondents to HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited on 10.11.2020. The petitioner was further informed that unless the outstanding amount of the alleged insurance loan was cleared, the mortgage documents would not be released. The petitioner was taken aback, as he had never applied for or consented to any separate loan for insurance. He was only informed at the time of sanction of the housing loan that approximately Rs.1,500/- per month would be charged towards insurance premium, which he regularly paid along with the installments. No separate loan agreement or 3 document was ever executed by him in respect of any insurance loan, nor did he authorize the respondents to remit a single premium amount to HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited. Immediately thereafter, the petitioner addressed a letter dated 16.05.2024 to Respondent No.3 expressing his willingness to clear the housing loan in full and objecting to the insistence on payment of the alleged insurance loan. A further representation dated 29.05.2024 was also submitted. In response, Respondent No.2 issued the impugned communication dated 31.05.2024 reiterating that the petitioner had availed the insurance loan and that, since the premium amount had been paid to HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited, the mortgage documents would not be released unless the balance of the insurance loan was cleared. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent- Bank, at the outset, submits that they will consider the application of the petitioner for One Time Settlement of the his loan if the petitioner approaches the Bank along with all relevant documents in this regard. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to the aforesaid submission. 5. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter and the allied submission of the parties, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-Bank to consider the One Time Settlement application of the petitioner regarding his loan amount and get the matter settled, in accordance with law, in an expeditious manner. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE Avinash