In the recent Kolkata HC judgment it was said that a Banker cannot publish the photos of the defaulting borrowers see Anr Vs State Bank of India, dt 3-5-2013, by justice Dipankar Datta. But my question is suppose the contract between the borrower and the Banker permits such a course, then what is the result. I thought for myself and came to the following conclusion. Am I right?. Please post comments.
Now the question is "what is the result when there is an agreement between the banker and borrower for publishing the names in case of default". The Kokata HC case did not deal with the same. Probably there is no such clause in the loan agreement. But what if such a clause is there. I feel the answer will be also negative in such cases also, reason being
While entering into the loan agreement, there should be consesus ad idem between the parties and they should stand on the same footing. But in case of Bank loan the Banker is always having the upper hand, and the borrower goes with a begging bowl. So the borrower will always say yes to the Banker and sign on all such papers that the Bank will require, otherwise he will not get the loan. In such cases it is nothing but coercing the borrower to sign on all papers, in which case the contract is hit. for a contract to be legal both the parties must stand on the same footing or position. If one can dictate the other, in such contracts, I think the same is to be dubbed as not legal. Hence what I feel is even if there is contract to publish photos of defaulters, the same cannot be said to be legal.
