Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM, J
DHANASEELAN – Appellant
Versus
CITY UNION BANK LTD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks to de-freeze bank account. (Para 1) |
| 2. requisition from authority is not valid. (Para 2) |
| 3. court permits account operation in absence of valid requisition. (Para 3) |
J U D G M E N T
1. The present Writ Petition is filed seeking direction to the Respondent No.1/Bank to de-freeze the account of the Petitioner maintained with the Respondent No.1. The learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.1/Bank on instructions submitted that the Bank received Ext.P2 Requisition for Rs.2,250/- in which the requisition authority is shown as the Respondent No.2.
2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that the Respondent No.2 has not submitted any requisition to the Bank. It appears that the requisition is made by the NCCRP without showing the correct SHO. In such case, the Petitioner cannot be prevented from operating the account, even limiting the amount to Rs.2,250/-, as the details of the requisitioning authority are not available to the Petitioner to take further proceedings.
3. In such situation, this Writ Petition is allowed, directing the Respondent Bank to permit the Petitioner to operate the account, in the absence of any other requi
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
