Madras High Court
M.Kesavapandian vs Reserve Bank Of India on 5 January, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.1277 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 05.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.1277 of 2020
M.Kesavapandian ... Appellant
Vs.
1. Reserve Bank of India,
Rep. by its Regional Director,
16, Rajaji Salai, Fort Glacis,
Chennai – 600 001.
2. Banking Ombudsman,
Reserve Bank of India,
16, Rajaji Salai, Fort Glacis,
Chennai – 600 001.
3. The Managing Director &
Chief Executive Officer,
City Union Bank Limited,
Administrative Office,
Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.
4. The Assistant General Manager,
City Union Bank Ltd.,
Administrative Office,
24B, Narayana Towers,
Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam,
Thanjavur District.
5. The Branch Manager,
City Union Bank,
Tiruchengode,
Namakkal District. ... Respondents
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/6
W.A.(MD)No.1277 of 2020
Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent Act, against the
order dated 30.09.2020 passed in W.P.(MD)No.12480 of 2020.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Muthukrishnan
For Respondents : Mr.K.R.Laxman
Standing Counsel for RBI
Mr.Sivaraman,
Standing Counsel for City Union Bank
JUDGMENT
[Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.]
The appellant is the borrower. He has defaulted in making payments.
Asking for higher amount, he sent several communications to the respondents 3
to 5. A reply was also given by the respondents 3 to 5 on 17.03.2020, inter alia,
alleging that the appellant was responsible from preventing the Bank officials
visiting his office, apart from, submitting fraudulent stock statement and made
withdrawals from the limit sanctioned.
2. The appellant filed a complaint alleging that illegally, his account
has been converted as Non-Performing Assets.
3. Thereafter, the appellant made another representation on 31.08.2020
stating that as per the Hon'ble Finance Minister's announcement dated
13.05.2020, he is entitled for further sanctioning of amount. He has also
approached the Banking Ombudsman, Reserve Bank of India, against the
respondents 3 to 5. Though styled as representation, it was only a letter of
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.1277 of 2020
accusation made by the appellant against the respondents 3 to 5. Thereafter, the
present writ petition has been filed by the appellant, seeking a Writ of Mandamus
to direct the respondents 3 to 5 to sanction further amount as per the Hon'ble
Finance Minister's Announcement dated 13.05.2020.
4. Before the learned Single Judge, the appellant was not represented
and upon hearing the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 3
to 5, the writ petition was dismissed, vide order dated 30.09.2020. The learned
Single Judge recorded the statements made by the learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the respondents 3 to 5 that the request made by the appellant was
rejected on 05.09.2020 and the same was communicated to him. Incidentally, the
other relief was also declined.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that it is
not correct to state that such a reply was given on 05.09.2020 and received by the
appellant. The appellant is entitled for payment as per the Hon'ble Finance
Minister's Announcement, dated 13.05.2020.
6. We do not find any merit in this appeal. Admittedly, the appellant
did not choose to represent before the Court, when the matter was taken up for
hearing. Secondly, the appellant had already approached the Court, apart from,
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.1277 of 2020
registering a complaint against the respondents 3 to 5. Even according to the
appellant, his account has been converted as Non-Performing Assets, as could be
seen from the averments contained in the complaint registered. Thus, the relief
as sought for by the appellant cannot be granted, particularly, when a statement
has been made by the respondents 3 to 5 and taken note of by the Court that the
appellant's request was rejected on 05.09.2020 and it was, accordingly,
communicated to him.
7. Though we declined a major relief sought for, taking into
consideration the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, we
direct the respondents 3 to 5 to send another copy of the communication dated
05.09.2020 to the appellant, within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the appellant can work out
his remedy, if he chooses to do so.
8. With the above direction, this Writ Appeal stands closed. No costs.
[M.M.S.J.,] [S.A.I.J.,]
05.01.2021
ogy
Note: 1. Issue order copy on or before 08.01.2021.
2. In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for
official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order
http://www.judis.nic.in that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the
W.A.(MD)No.1277 of 2020
responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1. The Regional Director,
Reserve Bank of India,
16, Rajaji Salai, Fort Glacis,
Chennai – 600 001.
2. Banking Ombudsman,
Reserve Bank of India,
16, Rajaji Salai, Fort Glacis,
Chennai – 600 001.
3. The Managing Director &
Chief Executive Officer,
City Union Bank Limited,
Administrative Office,
Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.
4. The Assistant General Manager,
City Union Bank Ltd.,
Administrative Office,
24B, Narayana Towers,
Gandhi Nagar, Kumbakonam,
Thanjavur District.
5. The Branch Manager,
City Union Bank,
Tiruchengode,
Namakkal District.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.1277 of 2020
M.M.SUNDRESH, J.
and
S.ANANTHI, J.
ogy
W.A.(MD)No.1277 of 2020
05.01.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
