Back
P.SATHASIVAM, ANIL R.DAVE
Zonal Manager, Central Bank of India – Appellant
Versus
Devi Ispat Ltd. – Respondent
Question 1? Question 2? Question 3?
Key Points: - The Bank contends writ petition under Article 226 is not maintainable to enforce contractual rights or return title deeds; whether writ jurisdiction can compel return of security documents in a contractual debt recovery context (!) (!) (!) - Whether disputes relating to interpretation of contract terms can be decided in writ proceedings, and under what circumstances a writ can issue for contractual matters involving a State instrumentality; including maintainability criteria and when alternative remedies apply (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) - Whether in the given factual matrix, where settlement of dues occurred via an arrangement with another nationalized bank and there is "nil" due, the High Court’s writ of mandamus directing return of title deeds is justified, and the appellate court’s scope to review such writ under Article 226 (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
JUDGMENT
P. Sathasivam, J. —
1)Leave granted.
2)This appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 11505 of 2010 is directed against the final judgment and order dated 05.04.2010 passed by the High Court at Calcutta in G.A. No. 2441 of 2009 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant-Bank herein against the order of the learned single Judge dated 24.08.2009 in W.P. No. 485 of 2009 directing the appellant-Bank to return forthwith the title deeds deposited by M/s Devi Ispat Ltd., the Respondent-Company herein.
3)Brief facts :
a) Respondent No.1 is a Company incorporated under the name and style of M/s Devi Ispat Ltd. The Respondent-Company carries on the business of manufacturing and trading in ingots and various other types of steel and for the said purpose requires financial support from the financial institutions like the appellant- Bank. Since the very inception of the respondent- Company, it has been banking with the appellant-Bank and availing various credit facilities like Term Loan, Working Capital Demand Loan, Cash Credit and Letter of Credit facility. On 16.10.2006, the respondent-Company wrote a letter to the appellant-Bank requesting it to review and enhance its cr
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
