IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-11-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Nazrudeen S/o.Syed Mohideen, No.

4/12,Mahalingapuram Main Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai -600 034.

Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. Reserve Bank of India, No. 6, Sansad Marg, Sansad Marg Area, New Delhi -110001.

2.M/s.ICICI Bank Ltd Mahalingapuram Branch, Nungambakkam, Chennai -600 034.

Respondent(s)

PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent bank to forthwith refund the sum of Rs. 25,00,000/-being the value of the stale Demand Draft No. 501395 dated 08.06.2023,together with interest @ 18 percentage per annum from 21.10.2024 till the date of payment.

For Petitioner(s): M/s.K.Harishankar For Respondent(s): Mr.C.Mohan & Ms.A.Rexy Josephine Mary for M/s.King And Partridge for R2

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed, directing the 2nd respondent bank to forthwith refund the sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- being the value of the stale Demand Draft No. 501395 dated 08.06.2023,together with interest @ 18 percentage per annum from 21.10.2024 till the date of payment.

2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is an account holder of the 2^nd respondent Bank. The petitioner had issued a demand draft bearing No.501395 to one O.P. Bose for the service of brokerage for the purchase of a property located in Gandhi Nagar, Adyar, for a consideration of Rs.9,50,00,000/-. The petitioner, for this purpose, had entered an agreement of sale with Mrs.Santha Rajabather dated 08.06.2023. Further, the petitioner also entered into an agreement with O.P.Bose titled as Agreement of Commission and others. It was agreed that the brokerage shall be an amount of Rs.2,20,00,000/- and an advance of Rs.25,00,000/- was paid by the petitioner to O.P Bose by way of demand draft bearing No.501395, and the same was recorded in the agreement and the balance amount was agreed to be paid at the time of registration of the sale deed. After the execution of the agreement, there was no response from Santha Rajabather nor O.P Bose. Further, O.P Bose did not abide by the terms of the respective agreement executed with him and he did not encash the demand draft issued to him and it was also lost and could not be traced. The petitioner had made several follow-ups to the 2^nd respondent bank after the expiry period of the demand draft issued to O.P. Bose. The management of the 2^nd respondent’s bank has not abided by its own rules and has kept the petitioner’s name in the suspense account for more than 2 years. It is the duty of the 2^nd respondent to transfer the demand draft amount from suspense account to the petitioner’s account, but the 2^nd respondent has failed to do so despite several reminders. Therefore, the petitioner, through his counsel, issued a legal notice on 21.05.2025 to the 2^nd respondent to take immediate steps to credit the amount of demand draft to the petitioner’s account. However, the 2nd respondent neither transferred the amount nor replied to the legal notice.

Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that during the pendency of the writ petition, the 2^nd respondent filed a counter affidavit, stating that, in cases where the cancellation of a misplaced or a lost demand draft involves a high amount, the petitioner is required to submit a Request letter, KYC documents, Idemnity to be taken duly executed on stamp paper and produce any one of the documents, namely I) NOC or consent from beneficiary (if purchaser initiated)/purchaser (if beneficiary initiated), ii) OR FIR copy, iii) OR Acknowledged police complaint copy, and iv) OR Court order. In view of the conditions stated in para 12 of the in the counter, the petitioner may be directed to submit the Request letter, KYC documents and Indemnity to be taken duly executed on stamp paper with this order.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent would submit that if paragra