Back
2025 Supreme(Telangana) 311
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
M/s. K.Krishna Reddy Contractors - Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana & Others - Respondents
Writ Petition No.10753 of 2023
Decided on : 01-05-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Sri D.R.Varma, learned counsel representing Sri C.S.N.Raju, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner on record.
For the Respondents: Sri R. Rajendra Prasad
A person cannot be penalized for failing to pay undeclared charges post-loan closure when prior communications contradict such claims, emphasizing adherence to agreed terms and principles of natural justice.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 300-A - Writ of Mandamus - Petitioner sought direction for the release of original documents after fully repaying a loan, alleging arbitrary actions by the respondent corporation. (Paras 2, 5, 11)
(B) Loan Agreement - Validity of premature premium charges - The petitioner contested the application of additional charges post loan closure. The court considered the alleged contradiction in communications from the corporation and emphasized natural justice principles in deciding on the petitioner's representation. (Paras 6, 11, 12)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner approached the court after fully repaying a loan, claiming the respondent corporation refused to release original documents as required by the loan agreement, despite multiple payments and assurances of closure.
Findings of Court:
The court directed the respondent corporation to duly consider the petitioner's representation regarding the loan closure and the release of documents.
Issues: The primary issues addressed were the legality of additional premature charges levied post loan closure and the compliance of the respondent with the agreed terms.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the respondent's failure to inform the petitioner about the premature premium charges constituted a legal inconsistency, warranting a reassessment of the situation.
Result: Writ Petition disposed of with directions to the respondent corporation.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's loan and payment history (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. claim of illegal charges and contractual violation (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. counterarguments from respondent regarding loan terms (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. court's analysis on premium charges and communication inconsistencies (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. court's emphasis on natural justice in corporate dealings. (Para 11) |
| 6. order for consideration of petitioner's representation (Para 12) |
ORDER :
Heard Sri D.R.Varma, learned counsel representing Sri C.S.N.Raju, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner on record, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance & Planning appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 and Sri R. Rajendra Prasad, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 5.
2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:
“To issue a writ order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent by not releasing the original documents deposited vide registered Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deed bearing Doc.Nos.6278 of 2012, dt. 14-09-2012 and 5633 of 2013, dated 12-07-2013 in-spite of paying the entire loan availed by the petitioner firm vide loan account number 74-908201 pursuant to the Notices dt. 06.11.2020, 02-09-2021, 06-04-2022 and 15-09-2022 as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of article 300-A of constitution and directing the 2nd respondent to execute re- conveyance deed in respect of the above Memorandum of Deposit Title Deed bearing Doc.Nos. 6278 of 2012, dt. 14- 09-2012 and 5633 of 2013, dt. 12-07-2013 in favour of the petitioner in the office of SRO, Rajendranagar and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case...”
3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, as per the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present writ petition, is as under:
It is the specific case of the petitioner that a term loan had been sanctioned vide sanction No. 006064 and Lmo.AFC/PROJ- 1/T-1/749082/2012-13, dated 06-07-2012 to a tune of 800 lakhs for construction of 4-screen multiplex and shopping mall at Sy.No. 495/E/EE, 436/E/EE 505/E/EE, 506/E/EE and 515/E/EE Attapur inner ring road, Rajendranagar Mandal, RR District under general loan scheme on development basis with 50% share in the project subject to some terms and conditions to repay the same in 33 quarterly instalments,payable on every 1st March, 1st June, 1st September and 1st December with annual rate of interest at 17% per annum.
It is the further the case of the petitioner that because of the financial crisis in the year 2016, the petitioner vide letter dated 20.05.2016, requested the corporation for wavier of outstanding monthly interest payable with a proposal to prepay the loan amount by raising funds from the sale of property in the mall as per the clause No.19 of sanction terms and requested to give NOC for the proposed sale of properties i.e., shop No 110, 302, 402 to third parties. The petitioner vide letter dated 08-06-2016 addressed to the Branch Manager APSFC, RR District East Branch, Chirag-Ali-Lane, Hyderabad intimated the payment of Rs.5 crores towards the loan repayment and to acknowledge the payment made to the bank account bearing No- 30291010000480 vide cheque No 318992 dated 08-06-2016 drawn on Syndicate Bank, Attapur Branch for an amount of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- (Rupees Five Crore Only) towards loan account No. 74908202 and further requested to issue the receipt for the payment made along with revised EMI schedule and balance loan amount payable after payment of Rs5.00 cr. The petitioner again vide letter dated 01-11-2016, addressed to the Branch Manager, APSFC,RR District East Branch, Chirag-Ali-Lane, Hyderabad intimated the fact of payment of Rs 81 Lakhs towards part repayment of loan amount and requested for reduction of Rate of Interest by at-least 1.50% and release of collateral s
