Skip to content

Random posts

Trending News

News
Income Tax | Sales Tax Incentive Under Govt Scheme For Industrial Promotion Is Capital Receipt, Not Taxable: Bombay High Court 01
5 hours ago
02
News
Supreme Court Issues Notice On Tamil Nadu Govt’s Plea Against HC’s Stay Of Amendments On Governor’s Power To Appoint VCs

Category Collection

  • Home
  • News
  • BNS Sections
  • Blog
  • Offences
  • BNSS with CrPC
  • Latest News
  • Home
  • News
  • Bombay High Court Asks Yes Bank To Pay 50K Compensation For Insisting Upon Aadhaar Card For Opening Account
  • News

Bombay High Court Asks Yes Bank To Pay 50K Compensation For Insisting Upon Aadhaar Card For Opening Account

Amit Kapoor2 days ago06 mins
1661572 justice ms sonak justice jitendra jain bombay hc

Whereas directing Sure Financial institution to pay compensation of Rs 50,000 to a litigant for insisting upon Aadhar Card for opening of account, the Bombay Excessive Courtroom has made it clear that September 26, 2018 onwards, accounts could possibly be opened with out insisting upon Aadhar Card.

The Petition earlier than the Excessive Courtroom was filed by a Petitioner, who couldn’t hire out his premises on hire resulting from an absence of a financial institution account.

The Division Bench of Justice M.S. Sonak & Justice Jitendra Jain stated, “Nevertheless, Justice Puttaswamy’s case was lastly disposed of by the Hon’ble Supreme Courtroom on twenty sixth September 2018. The Hon’ble Supreme Courtroom struck down the requirement of offering an Aadhar Card for opening a Checking account. Subsequently, from twenty sixth September 2018 onwards, there was no obstacle to the Respondent-Financial institution opening the Checking account with out insisting on the Aadhaar Card.”

Advocate Niyam Bhasin represented the Petitioner.

Factual Background

The Petitioner had premises in Bombay, and there had been appreciable difficulties in renting out these premises as a result of lack of a Checking account within the identify of the Petitioner. The Petitioner utilized to the Respondent-Financial institution for the opening of a Checking account, and the Financial institution knowledgeable the Petitioner that offering an Aadhar Card was necessary.

The Petitioner represented to the Financial institution and even identified interim orders made by the Supreme Courtroom, suggesting that insisting on an Aadhaar Card for opening a Checking account was not authorized or correct. Nevertheless, for the reason that Respondent-Financial institution didn’t yield, the Petitioner instituted the Petition. Following the Courtroom’s order, the Respondent-Financial institution opened a Financial institution account within the identify of the Petitioner. Nevertheless, it was the petitioner’s case that the Rule was issued on the prayer for damages within the order, and the Financial institution was additionally given a chance to file its reply insofar because the prayer for damages was involved. The Respondent-Financial institution had not bothered to file any reply on the facet of the prayer for compensation.

Reasoning

The Bench famous that in April 2018, when the Financial institution insisted upon the Petitioner’s Aadhar Card, there interim orders made by the Supreme Courtroom within the case of Justice Puttaswamy (Retd) & Anr vs Union of India & Ors (2012) had been working. The orders prima facie advised that on the related time, Financial institution accounts had been to be opened provided that a celebration may produce proof of getting utilized for an Aadhaar Card. The Bench additional observed that Justice Puttaswamy’s case was lastly disposed of, and the Courtroom struck down the requirement of offering an Aadhar Card for opening a Financial institution account. As per the Bench, from September 26, 2018 onwards, there was no obstacle on the Financial institution to open the account with out insisting on the Aadhaar Card. The Checking account was in the end opened in January 2019 within the identify of the Petitioner.

“Contemplating the above circumstances, we imagine that the declare for compensation within the quantity of Rs. 10 Lakhs is exaggerated and can’t be granted. Nevertheless, we agree with the realized counsel for the Petitioner that there was no justification for not opening the Checking account after twenty sixth September 2018. The Checking account was in the end opened in January 2019. Subsequently, for a interval of three to 4 months, the Petitioner was unable to hire out the premises”, it stated.

Thus, the Bench directed the Respondent-Financial institution to pay the Petitioner compensation of Rs. 50,000 inside eight weeks from the date on which the Petitioner gives a duplicate of this order to the Respondent-Financial institution.

Trigger Title: Microfibers Pvt Ltd v. Sure Financial institution Ltd & Ors. (Case No.: Writ Petition No. 1706 of 2018)

Look

Petitioner: Advocate Niyam Bhasin

Click here to read/download Order

Source link

Tagged: Aadhar Card Bank Account Bombay High Court Justice Jitendra Jain Justice M.S. Sonak Premises Rent

Post navigation

Previous: Section 25F, Industrial Disputes Act; Actual Acceptance Of Compensation Not Required For Compliance: MP HC
Next: Lawyer Moves Calcutta High Court Seeking CBI Probe Into South Calcutta Law College Gang-Rape

Related News

426138 bombay high court calls for a swift legal process to avoid prolonged incarceration

Income Tax | Sales Tax Incentive Under Govt Scheme For Industrial Promotion Is Capital Receipt, Not Taxable: Bombay High Court

Amit Kapoor5 hours ago 0
531898 tamil nadu map and sc.webp

Supreme Court Issues Notice On Tamil Nadu Govt’s Plea Against HC’s Stay Of Amendments On Governor’s Power To Appoint VCs

Amit Kapoor5 hours ago 0
580076 job 01.webp

Job Updates- Assistant Law Officer And Legal Assistant Vacancy At National Commission For Women

Amit Kapoor5 hours ago 0

NEET-UG 2025, Waqf Rules Notified, Dabur v. Patanjali, Krishna Janmabhoomi, Courts Today, Legal News

Amit Kapoor5 hours ago 0
  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Blog
  • Latest News
  • News

Trending News

News
Income Tax | Sales Tax Incentive Under Govt Scheme For Industrial Promotion Is Capital Receipt, Not Taxable: Bombay High Court

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax | Sales Tax Incentive Under Govt Scheme For Industrial Promotion Is Capital Receipt, Not Taxable: Bombay High Court
  • Supreme Court Issues Notice On Tamil Nadu Govt’s Plea Against HC’s Stay Of Amendments On Governor’s Power To Appoint VCs
  • Job Updates- Assistant Law Officer And Legal Assistant Vacancy At National Commission For Women
  • NEET-UG 2025, Waqf Rules Notified, Dabur v. Patanjali, Krishna Janmabhoomi, Courts Today, Legal News
  • Job Updates- LLB Internship Programme At Department Of Legal Affairs [Apply Now]

Archives

  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • March 2025
bnssections.in 2025 Powered By BlazeThemes.
  • Contact
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms & Conditions
  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy