Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 21601

HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J
BHAIRAVI D/O MOHAN OZA AND W/O APURVA PATEL HER SELF AND ONLY LHRS OF LATE SANGEETA MOHAN OZA – Appellant
Versus
AUTHORIZED OFFICER, BANK OF BARODA – Respondent
C/SCA/355/2024

Petitioner Advocates:UMARFARUK M KHARADI(8155) ,Respondent Advocate: MR BIJU A NAIR(5703)

A power of attorney holder's authority to redeem pledged property must be verified by a competent Civil Court, making a writ petition for such relief not maintainable.

Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure Code - Writ Jurisdiction - The petitioner sought the return of pledged ornaments from a bank upon repayment of a gold loan, but the bank refused to release them to the power of attorney holder. The court held that the validity of the power of attorney must be verified by a competent Civil Court. (Paras 1-3)

(B) Maintainability of Writ Petition - The court ruled that the petitioner should approach the Civil Court for such matters, as the writ petition was not maintainable for the requested relief. (Paras 2-3)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed a petition to redeem gold ornaments pledged by their mother as security for a loan, but the bank required the original borrower to be present or a court order for release.

Findings of Court:
The court determined that the matter should be resolved in a Civil Court, as the authenticity of the power of attorney needed verification.

Issues: The main issue was whether the power of attorney holder could claim the ornaments without the original borrower being present.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the validity of the power of attorney must be established in a Civil Court, and a writ petition was not the appropriate remedy.

Result: Petition dismissed.

ORDER

1. Present petition is filed by the petitioner, the petitioner has prayed for redeem the pledge ornaments upon receiving full and final payment in connection with the gold loan account No.

58280400000071. It appears that the golden ornaments of mother of the petitioner are lying with the respondent-Bank as a security against the advancement of the financial assistance. For recovery of the said ornaments which is put under the security against the financial assistance which was obtained by the mother of the present petitioner. Now, on repayment of said financial dues, the petitioner asked the respondent-Bank to return the golden ornaments to power of attorney holder of the original petitioner who is staying abroad.

Since the power of attorney had approached the respondent-Bank to hand over the said ornaments as he is having the power of attorney of the original borrower, the bank has refused to accept the power of attorney for releasing the golden ornaments which was originally claimed by the mother of the petitioner and they have requests the original petitioner that to call the original petitioner for getting the possession of the golden ornaments or get appropriate order from the Civil Court. Instead of that, the petitioner by way of preferring the present petition urged before this Court that let the directions be issued against the respondent-Bank to hand over the golden ornaments of the original borrower in favour of the power of attorney holder.

2. Considering the facts of the present case, this Court can’t issue any writ to handover the golden ornaments as it is requested by the power of attorney holder and whether that power of attorney holder is genuine or not, it is to be verified and examine by the competent Civil Court and therefore, the petitioner ought to have approached the competent Civil Court instead of filing the writ petition for getting such direction.

3. In view of that, the present petition is not maintainable. Let the petitioner may approach the competent Civil Court or make a request to the competent Bank authority having branch at Dubai With the above directions, this petition stands disposed of.

Notice is discharged.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 21601

HIGH COURT OF GUJARATMR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, JBHAIRAVI D/O MOHAN OZA AND W/O APURVA PATEL HER SELF AND ONLY LHRS OF LATE SANGEETA MOHAN OZA – AppellantVersusAUTHORIZED OFFICER, BANK OF BARODA – RespondentC/SCA/355/2024

A power of attorney holder's authority to redeem pledged property must be verified by a competent Civil Court, making a writ petition for such relief not maintainable.

HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J
BHAIRAVI D/O MOHAN OZA AND W/O APURVA PATEL HER SELF AND ONLY LHRS OF LATE SANGEETA MOHAN OZA – Appellant
Versus
AUTHORIZED OFFICER, BANK OF BARODA – Respondent
C/SCA/355/2024