- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 20 December 2023
- Bench
- G.R.Swaminathan
- Case no.
- WP(MD) 30501/2023
Judgment
ORDER Heard both sides.
2.The petitioner had availed loan from the respondent Bank. The loan account has since been settled. The petitioner wants her original documents back. The respondent is taking the stand that the petitioner must withdraw all the cases filed against the Bank.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner categorically asserts that as on date no case is pending between the petitioner and the respondent. The said statement is recorded. If the statement turns out to be incorrect, it is open to the respondents herein to file a Miscellaneous Petition to recall of this order.
4.The respondents are directed to return the petition mentioned documents to the petitioner immediately and without delay. The respondents can of course take indemnity bond and also called upon the petitioner to fulfil any other usual banking formalities.
5.This writ petition is allowed on these terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
20.12.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No MGA
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. MGA
20.12.2023
Case details
Parties and counsel
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 20.12.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN Sasikumar ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Authorized Officer / Chief Manager, Bank of Baroda, ROSARB, 1st Floor, Plot No.14, Door No.3,4,5, Sakthi Velamal 10th Street, S.S.Colony, Madurai – 625 020. 2.The Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, Pacheri Branch, Sivagangai. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings BOB.SARMDR.GEN.2023-24/ dated 27.10.2023 and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and further directing the respondents to release the Original Documents mentioned in memorandum of deposit of title deeds within a time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Chandrasekar For Respondents : Mr.P.Pethu Rajesh Standing Counsel
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.