Saturday, June 6, 2020

COVID-19: MODI-FIED STIMULI AND REGULATORY RESPONSES


Part-II: RBI’s Covid-19 Loan Moratorium & Judicial Responses

RBI’s Covid-19 Interventions & Relief Measures:

The Reserve Bank of India (“RBI”), as the Central Bank of our country, did not remain a mute witness in the face of the Covid-19 global pandemic.  Taking a cue from the various steps initiated by the Modi Government for the prevention and control of the local transmission of the disease, the RBI for its part devised and put in place operational and business continuity plans for the banking sector, with a view to ensuring that one of the major critical infrastructures of any country, is not derailed by the rapid spread of the disease.  On March 16, 2020, RBI issued advisories to all the scheduled commercial banks, local area banks, small finance banks, payment banks, urban cooperative banks and Non-Finance Business Companies (“NBFCs”) aimed at (a) devising strategy and monitoring mechanism concerning the spread of the disease within the said organisations and their employees and to prevent spread of panic amongst staff and members of the public; (b) taking stock of critical processes and revisiting business continuity plans to prevent any disruption of banking services due to absenteeism arising from infections or quarantine of employees;  (c) sensitizing employees at all levels on preventive measures from time to time; (d) encourage their customers to use digital banking facilities as far as possible and it also called upon the sector to constitute a Quick Response Team to monitor the situation closely from business and social perspective(1).  The RBI had since March 19 sequestered and quarantined  a cross-disciplinary and critical team of 150 officials to operate from a remote location in a hotel (away from their homes so as not to be affected by Covid-19) closer to its data centre so that it can continue to seamless operate, issue advisories and directives to the banking sector, maintain its oversight and control over the sector, protect its data centres and run the entire gamut of RBI activities on a 24X7 basis without any hindrance during the pandemic(2).  In this fashion, RBI managed not only to stay afloat without being down and drowned in the gulf of the global pandemic, but, also managed to provide critical leadership and direction to the banking sector in the country paving way for the continued availability and accessibility to the banks, ATMs and their digital payment platforms even when the entire country had remained in lockdown which is no mean an achievement considering the massive population, technology barriers and social and geographical challenges of our country.

RBI’s Covid-19 Loan Moratorium Announcements:

Recognising the extraordinary and unprecedented situation caused by Covid-19 outbreak, the RBI had been in action on an almost daily basis to alleviate the financial stress, build confidence and keep the financial system sound and functional.  It recognized the significance of mitigating the burden of debt servicing brought about by disruptions on account of Covid-19 pandemic and decided to devise moratorium on term loans; deferring interest payments on working capital; easing of working capital financing, amongst others.  In line with the same, all commercial banks (including regional rural banks, small finance banks and local area banks), co-operative banks, all-India Financial Institutions and NBFCs (including housing finance companies and micro-finance institutions) (“Lending Institutions”) were permitted by its March 27, 2020 announcement to allow a moratorium of three months on payment of installments in respect of all term loans outstanding as on March 1, 2020(3).  The said announcement also permitted the Lending Institutions to allow deferment of three months on the payment of interest in respect of working capital facilities such as cash credit/overdraft so as to collect the accumulated interest for the period after the expiry of the deferment period.  It also took care to stipulate that the moratorium on term loans and the deferring of interest payments on working capital shall not result in asset classification downgrade i.e. NPA declaration or as a default for the purposes of reporting to the credit information companies or have any adverse impact on the credit history of the borrowers.  Soon, the Indian Banking Association clarified on April 1, 2020 that this RBI announcement will be applicable to all term loans (including agricultural term loans, retail, crop loans and loans under Pool Purchases) and cash credit/overdraft facilities whose accounts were standard assets as on 1st March 2020(4).  It was also clarified that due to this relief package no penal interest or charges will be payable to the banks and SEBI had also allowed Credit Rating Agencies not to consider the delay as default by listed companies.  Indian Banking Association also assured that the borrowers need not get upset if any bank staff or its collection agents approach for repayment and that all that they need to inform is that they wish to avail the benefit of being extended under the regulatory package.  It was also clarified that the RBI moratorium will also apply to credit card dues.

In continuation to its earlier announcement dated March 27, RBI realized that the onset of Covid-19 had exacerbated the challenges of borrowers even to honour their commitments which had fallen due on or before February 29, 2020 in standard accounts.  Hence, it directed the Lending Institutions to grant moratorium or deferment to all accounts which were standard as on March 1, 2020 by excluding the moratorium period from the 90-day NPA norm i.e. to effect a standstill in the asset classification for all such accounts from March 1, 2020 to May 31, 2020(5).  In view of the extension of the lockdown and continuing disruptions on account of Covid-19, on May 22, 2020, RBI permitted the Lending Institutions to extend moratorium by another three months i.e. from June 1, 2020 to August 31, 2020, both in respect of the term loans and working capital facilities and also clarified that the asset classification would be subject to a standstill from March 1, 2020 to August 31, 2020(6).

Covid-19 Moratorium and Judicial Responses:

While the RBI had initiated laudable relief packages to borrowers who were having difficulty in servicing their loan obligations, the judiciary, also rose up to the occasion and doled out reliefs liberally.  As ‘procedure is only a handmaiden of justice’, the higher judiciary in this country accepted online writ petitions and suits and entertained the submissions of the counsels through video conferencing and orders were passed subject to the condition that court fees and other filing formalities will need to be complied with by the applicants with a timeframe after lockdown is formally lifted.  In this fashion, in order to protect critical operations and asset classifications as well as the inescapable consequences that may befall on a borrower being declared NPA during the Covid-19 pandemic de hors the RBI announcements, the higher judiciary moulded and granted equitable reliefs which we will trace briefly hereunder.

Intervention in SARFAESI proceedings during lockdown:

The Karnataka High Court intervened and granted interim protection to borrowers restricting the banks from auctioning the secured properties initiated under the SARFAESI Act during the lockdown period(7).  Andhra Pradesh High Court came to the rescue of a defaulting borrower and instead of auctioning the hospital mortgaged with banks under the SARFAESI Act which would lead to closure of its operations, the Court accepted the request of the borrower to use the hospital alongwith their doctors and the medical facilities available therein to treat Covid-19 patients  until further orders(8).  The Delhi High Court permitted a borrower and his family with minor children who was disposed of the secured property under SARFAESI Act to temporarily re-occupy a portion of the secured property until lockdown is lifted(9).

Intervention in Sale of Pledged Shares and Credit Rating Downgrade during lockdown:

The Bombay High Court restrained a debenture trustee by way of interim injunction against the sale of the shares pledged by the borrower when the share values had collapsed in the market during Covid-19 lockdown(10).  An injunction was issued to restrain a credit rating agency from proceeding to downgrade the credit rating of the borrower(11).

Intervention in NPA Declaration during lockdown:

The Delhi High Court came to the rescue of a borrower by liberally interpreting RBI’s moratorium announcement to cover default periods falling earlier to March 1, 2020 thereby temporarily restraining the bank against declaring such account as NPA(12).  The Bombay High Court in similar circumstances took a view to protect both the borrower and the bank’s interests and passed interim order directing the borrower to regularize the defaulted instalments prior to March 1, 2020 so as to take benefit of the RBI moratorium order within a timeframe fixed by it and in the meanwhile restrained the bank from selling the pledged shares or declare the account as NPA(13) and relying on this decision, although a writ petition (and not a commercial suit) was preferred against a private bank, notwithstanding the non-maintainability of writ petition and other defects in the writ petition, the Bombay High Court once again balanced both the borrower and bank’s interest in view of the Covid-19 and lockdown by temporarily injuncting the bank from declaration of NPA till the lockdown period subsists and subject to the condition that the petitioner regularize the earlier two monthly instalments which had fallen due prior to March 1, 2020(14).  The Delhi High Court restrained byway of  an interim injunction a bank from declaring the borrower’s account as NPA as it could not collect fees from its students during the lockdown period in view of the orders issued by the Uttar Pradesh Government directing educational institutions not to collect fees from students during the lockdown(15).  The Delhi High Court also granted interim injunction against the invocation and encashment of bank guarantees until such time the National Company Law Tribunal (which had closed its sittings) resumes its hearings in view of the lockdown(16).  Telangana High Court restrained by way of interim injunction a bank from debiting amounts due under Letters of Credit  or taking other coercive steps including imposition of ancillary interest(17).  Delhi High Court once again granted the restoration of status quo ante to a borrower’s account rather than declaring it NPA in terms of the RBI’s moratorium announcement by directing it to regularize the past defaults which arose in December 2019(18).  Assessment orders passed by income tax authorities in disregard to the lockdown period and rejecting the requests for adjournment were set aside and liberty was granted to the authorities to issue fresh showcause notices after the lockdown is lifted by granting due opportunities to the assessee(19).  In the light of its earlier orders, the Delhi High Court once again restrained a financial institution from taking any coercive action against the borrower including declassification of it in relation to a factoring facility availed by it(20).  During the lockdown period, the Delhi High Court had also restrained the disconnection of the interconnecting feeder lines of the wind turbine generators and power generation to the pooling substation until further orders(21).  The Supreme Court had also issued a direction to the RBI to ensure the implementation of its moratorium announcement dated 27.03.2020 in its letter and spirit(22).  The Delhi High Court had also restrained a bank in relation to the borrower (which is an NBFC having several fixed deposits created with the bank) from not insisting on replenishment of the amount till the next hearing(23).  Delhi High Court had also directed the RBI to permit customers during the pandemic from withdrawing their money from their accounts by relaxing the moratorium against withdrawal from the PMC Bank(24).  Rajasthan High Court restrained a secured lender from auction and sale of the property of the borrower in a very unusual manner to third parties despite the borrower was willing to purchase the same(25).  However, the Delhi High Court refused to grant injunction against the encashment of bank guarantees established on behalf of the contractor despite recognizing that Covid-19 constitutes force majeure, since the contractor had committed the contractual breaches and default well before the Covid-19 pandemic arose and lockdown was imposed in the country(26).

It would be evident from the above that taking a cue from the Modi 2.0 Government’s resolve to grant reliefs and ameliorative measures to the borrowers during the Covid-19 pandemic, the RBI, as a regulator, and the higher judiciary reveled each other in coming to the rescue of the hapless borrowers who were/are bearing the brunt of the pandemic with their businesses hit and employees affected and revenue streams having almost dried up.  It is heartening to note that all the powers that be are working in a mission mode during this hour of unprecedented crisis and it is only satisfying that law and its just enforcement has not lagged behind in this regard.

End Notes:
(1)      RBI Letter No.RBI/2019-20/172 DoS.CO.PPG.BC.01/11.01.005/2019-20 dated March 16, 2020.
(3)      RBI Governor’s Statement – Seventh Bi-monthly Monetary Policy Statement, 2019-20, March 27, 2020 and RBI Press Release No.2019-2020/2130 dated March 27, 2020.
(4)      Frequently Asked Questions: RBI Allowed Banks to Declare Moratorium on Term Loans, issued by Press Information Bureau on April 1, 2020.
(5)      RBI Governor’s Statement, April 17, 2020 and RBI reference No.2019-RBI/2019-20/220 DOR.No.BP.BC.63/21.04.048/2019-20 dated April 17, 2020.
(6)      RBI Press Release No.2019-2020/2392 dated May 22, 2020.
(7)      Order dated 24.03.2020 in W.P.No.6632, 6641, 6643, 6645 and 6653 of 2020.
(8)      Purna Sai Hospitals vs. Syndicate Bank and Anr. Order dated 31.03.2020 in W.P. No.8150/2020.
(9)      Ajay Kumar vs. IIFL Home Finance Limited Order dated 09.04.2020 passed in W.P.(C) 2958/2020.
(10)    Rural Fairprice Wholesale Limited & Anr. vs. IDBI Trusteeship Services Limited & ors. Order dated 30.03.2020 passed in commercial suit No.(L) 307/2020.
(11)    India Bulls Housing Finance Ltd. Vs. Securities Exchange Board of India and Anr. Order dated 03.04.2020 passed in W.P.(C) Urgent No.7/2020.
(12)    Anant Raj Limited vs. Yes Bank Ltd. Order dated 06.04.2020 in W.P.(C) Urgent 5/2020.
(13)    Order dated 07.04.2020 in Commercial Suit No.LD-VC-7 of 2020 alongwith IA No.LD-VC-7(IA) of 2020.
(14)    Transcon Skycity Pvt. Ltd. And Ors vs. ICICI Bank and Ors. Order dated 11.04.2020 passed in W.P. Nos.LD-VC No.28 & 30 of 2020.
(15)    Shakuntla Educational & Welfare Society vs. Punjab & Sind Bank Order dated 13.04.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.2959/2020.
(16)    Ashwini Mehra vs. Indian Oil Corporation Limited and Ors. Order dated 17.04.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.2966/2020 & CM Appeals.10297-99/2020.
(17)    Pennar Industries Limited & Anr. vs. Reserve Bank of India and Anr. order dated 01.05.2020 passed in I.A No.3 of 2020 in WP No.6573/2020.
(18)    JR Toll Road Private Limited vs. Yes Bank Ltd. Order dated 17.04.2020 passed in W.P (C) No.2970/2020
(19)    BT India Private Limited vs. Income Tax Officer Order dated 22.04.2020 passed in W.P.(C) Nos.2981 & 2984 of 2020.
(20)    Eastman Auto & Power Limited vs. Reserve Bank of India and Ors. Order dated 27.04.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.2997/2020 & CM Appl. 10397-10399 of 2020.
(21)    Vanilla Clean Power Pvt. Limited and Anr. vs. Inox Wind Infrastructure Services Limited Order dated 29.04.2020 passed in OMP.(I) (Comm) 103 & 104 of 2020.
(22)    Kamal Kumar Kalia vs. Union of India and Anr. Order dated 30.04.2020 passed in Diary No.10955/2020.
(23)    India Bulls Housing Finance Ltd. vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. & Ors. Order dated 01.05.2020 passed in W.P (C) 3033/2020.
(24)    Bejon Kumar Mishra vs. Union of India & Ors. Order dated 28.05.2020 in W.P(C) 11543/2019
(25)    Gyanesh Kumar Sharma and Anr. vs. RBI & Ors. Order dated 29.05.2020 in S.B. Civil WP No.5748/2020.
(26)    Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. vs. Vedanta Limited & Anr. Order dated 29.05.2020 in OMP(I) (Comm.) No.88/2020 & I.A.s.3696-3697/2020.

No comments: