CHENNAI: The Supreme Court has invoked its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to grant relief to a woman who was widowed during the Covid-19 pandemic, directing a reduction in her outstanding loan liability in a case that highlights the court’s equitable approach in exceptional circumstances.
The woman had challenged two orders of the Madras High Court dated September 10, 2024, and October 28, 2024, which had turned down her plea to repay the loan under an expired one-time settlement (OTS) scheme and refused to direct the bank to release the title deeds of her late husband’s property.
A bench of the apex court late last week took note of the woman’s precarious financial condition following the death of her husband during the pandemic, which had left her as the sole caregiver for her children and burdened with substantial debt. Observing that a strict application of contractual and statutory provisions would cause undue hardship, the court exercised its authority under Article 142 to do “complete justice” between the parties.
The Supreme Court ordered that the woman’s remaining loan liability be scaled down to a more manageable amount, taking into account her limited income and responsibilities. It also directed the lender to adjust the repayment terms accordingly, with the objective of ensuring that she is not pushed into further financial distress.
In its order, the Supreme Court underscored that the extraordinary impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on families, livelihoods and financial stability cannot be ignored, and that courts must remain sensitive to the human dimensions of such cases. The bench noted that Article 142 is meant to be used sparingly, but can be invoked in situations where the facts demand a compassionate and pragmatic solution.
Legal observers said the ruling reinforces the court’s willingness to balance the rights of lenders with considerations of fairness and social justice, particularly when borrowers are faced with circumstances beyond their control. The judgment is also being seen as a reminder of the judiciary’s role in providing relief in exceptional cases where existing legal frameworks may not adequately address extreme hardship.
While the order does not lay down a general precedent for loan waivers or reductions, it signals that courts may, in rare and deserving cases, step in to mould relief using their constitutional powers. For the petitioner, the decision offers a measure of financial breathing space and a chance to rebuild her life after the profound personal and economic loss suffered during the pandemic.