Ravi Bhartia And Ors vs State Bank Of India
2026 Latest Caselaw 142 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Ravi Bhartia And Ors vs State Bank Of India on 19 January, 2026

Author: Rajasekhar Mantha

Bench: Rajasekhar Mantha

OD-3

                                     ORDER SHEET
                            IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                             CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                     ORIGINAL SIDE



                               IA NO:GA/1/2018;GA/5/2025
                                   WITH WPO/1050/2016
                                      In APO/67/2018
                                  RAVI BHARTIA AND ORS
                                            -VS-
                                   STATE BANK OF INDIA


BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE RAJASEKHAR MANTHA
And
The Hon'ble JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR GUPTA
Date: 19.01.2026.



                  Mr. S. Mukherjee, Adv.; Ms. N. Akbar, Adv.; Ms. M. Akbar, Adv., appear.
                                           Mr. S. Roy, Adv.; Mr. S. Mahato, Adv., appear.


 1. The Court: The appeal is directed against the order dated January 17, 2018,

       passed by a Single Bench of this Court.

 2. The reliefs claimed in the writ petition were disallowed.

 3. The facts of the case are briefly that the respondent State Bank of India has

advanced fund and non-fund based credit facilities to the appellants-writ

petitioners and associates. The non-fund facilities were the performance of the 5

bank guarantees, issued to the Bangladesh Railways at Chittagong.

4. A compromise settlement was entered into by the appellants with the

respondent Bank. The outstanding dues under the fund based facilities were

settled.

5. In so far as the non-fund based facilities are concerned, since the bank

guarantees issued by State Bank of India at the instance of the appellants and

associates to the Bangladesh Railways were alive and could have been invoked,

the appellants were required to secure the value thereof with fixed deposit

accounts. The appellants have done so. A sum of Rs.1,11,02,647/- in the form

of nine several fixed deposits were opened by the appellants and associates and

the lien of the Bank was marked on the said deposits to secure potential claim

of the beneficiaries' under the nine bank guarantees.

6. The writ petition was dismissed and rightly so by the Single Bench since the

bank guarantees were alive as on the date of filing of the writ petition and the

impugned judgment, i.e. January 17, 2018.

7. Certain subsequent events have been brought on record by the appellants and

the Bank in the affidavit tin opposition filed to GA/1/2018. The State Bank of

India has filed 5 letters dated October 25, 2025. The said letters were addressed

to the Controller of Stores/Project Bangladesh Railways, Chittagong. By the

said letter, the Bank notified the beneficiaries that there was no fault in

invocation of the bank guarantees during their subsistence. The bank

guarantees have expired.

8. The Bank has decided to reverse the notified amount under the bank

guarantees. The beneficiaries were asked to return the original bank guarantees

along with a no claim letter. The said letters were returned with postal

endorsement that the beneficiaries did not exist at the said address.

9. The Bank thereafter obtained the email ID of the beneficiaries and notified the

contents of the letter dated October 25, 2025.

10. In view of the aforesaid subsequent events, namely expiry of the nine bank

guarantees, there being no invocation of the same during their subsistence and

validity, the State Bank of India is no longer liable to the beneficiaries under the

bank guarantees in question.

11. Having regard to the above, the State Bank of India is liable to release the said

nine fixed deposit accounts amount totaling to Rs.1,11,02,647/- together with

all accrued interest to the appellants. Any charges that the Bank may have

incurred or any interest credited to the account of the borrowers, may be

deducted by the Bank.

12. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Bank has not credited any

interest that accrued on the aforesaid FD accounts at any point of time. Learned

counsel for the Bank submits that the Bank may have made payment of some

interest to the appellants.

13. The Bank shall credit the maturity value of the aforesaid 9 fixed deposit

accounts together with accrued interest minus the sums indicated hereinabove

within a period of ten days from date. The payment shall be made by

RTGS/NEFT/electronic transfer to the bank accounts of the appellants

particulars whereof shall be furnished by the Advocate on Record of the

appellants to the Advocate on Record for the respondent State Bank of India.

14. The aforesaid order is passed since there are no further disputed questions of

fact to be gone into. The borrowers and their associates shall withdraw or not

press the civil suits i.e., CS/273/2002 and CS/464/2002 against the State

Bank of India. Upon payment of the aforesaid amount by the Bank to the

appellants and associates, neither party, i.e. the appellants or the State Bank of

India shall have any claim against one another. All accounts between the parties

shall be deemed to have been settled.

15. The Bank shall furnish a statement in respect of the aforesaid nine FDs,

indicating the principal amount and the interest accrued thereon from time to

time, and also the rate of interest applied by the Bank. Further, the bank shall

indicate in the said statement any amount that the bank has paid till date to the

appellant and all deductions made therefrom, to the Advocate on Record of the

appellants.

16. With the aforesaid observations, APO/67/2018 along with all connected

applications stands disposed of.

(RAJASEKHAR MANTHA, J.)

(AJAY KUMAR GUPTA, J.) tk