Madras High Court
Sarath Kakumanu vs The Chief Manager on 14 October, 2022
WP.No.30146 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.10.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
WP.No.30146 of 2011 & M.P.No.1 of 2011
Sarath Kakumanu ... Petitioner
Vs
1. The Chief Manager
Andhra Bank, T.T.K.Road,
Chennai – 600 018.
2. The Assistant General Manager,
Andhra Bank, T.T.K.Road,
Chennai – 600 018.
3. The Chairman and Managing Director,
Andhra Bank, No.5-9-11, Salfabad,
Dr.Pattabi Bhawan, Hyderabad,
Andhra Pradesh – 500 004. ... Respondents
Prayer:- This Writ Petition is filed, under the Article 226 of Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to forthwith
return the original Sale Deed Document No.3558 of 1995 dated
15.07.1995 on the file of Sub Registrar Officer at Adyar bearing Survey
No.231/2A and measuring in all about 23.83 Cents in Kottivakkam
Village.
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.30146 of 2011
For Petitioner : Mrs.Abitha Banu
For Respondents : Mr.Jayesh B.Dolia
for M/s.Aiyar & Dolia
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents to forthwith
return the original Sale Deed Document No.3558 of 1995 dated
15.07.1995 on the file of Sub Registrar Officer at Adyar bearing Survey
No.231/2A and measuring in all about 23.83 Cents in Kottivakkam
Village.
2. The case of the petitioner is that M/s.Pioneer Alloy Castings
Private Limited company was founded by the father of the petitioner. As
the said company required some additional finances on temporary basis in
the year 2004 for which the bank requested for additional security and the
petitioner's father has given additional security for a brief period of three
months. The said loan has been repaid and loan account has been closed
even during the life time of the petitioner' father. Thereafter, despite several
requests to the respondents to return the documents, the respondents have
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.30146 of 2011
not returned the documents. On the other hand, the respondents took a
view that the petitioner stood as a guarantor for the mortgage loan availed
by Vantage Resorts and Clubs Private Limited and deposited title deeds for
the said mortgage loan, against which the bank has initiated proceedings
under the SARFAESI Act for recovery and therefore, they are exercising a
general lien on the title deeds deposited by the petitioner. Therefore, it is
his contention that the bank invoking general lien under section 171 of the
Indian Contract Act will not arise. Hence, seeks a direction to return the
documents.
3. Counter has been filed by the respondents. Wherein it is stated
that the petitioner besides availing loan has executed collateral security in
respect of the mortgage loan availed by Vantage Resorts and Clubs Private
Limited. It is the contention of the respondent that the petitioner is one of
the guarantor for the mortgage loan facility availed by the Vantage Resorts
and Clubs Private Limited and he has executed General Form of Guarantee
dated 29.12.2009 in respect of Survey No.231/2A measuring to an extent
of 23.83 cents as collateral security for the due repayment of the loan
availed by Vantage Resorts and Clubs Private Limited vide offer of security
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.30146 of 2011
and mortgage deed dated 19.03.2008. As the amount has not been settled,
the bank has filed Original Application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal
in O.A.No.1 of 2012 wherein the writ petitioner was made as the fifth
defendant. The property in respect of which title deed is sought to be
returned is also shown as one of the property in the above application. The
Debt Recovery Tribunal by its Order dated 27.09.2019 allowed the
application and recovery certificate has been issued for a sum of
Rs.4,85,54,271.30. Therefore, submitted that as the amount bas not been
fully paid, the documents cannot be returned.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
the petitioner created a mortgage in respect of the loan available by the
Pioneer Alloy Castings Private Limited and the above said loan has been
fully repaid which has also been accepted by the respondents in their
correspondence dated 01.12.2011, wherein it is stated that general lien has
been exercised by the bank. Now a contrary stand has been taken in the
counter as if the a mortgage loan has been availed by Vantage Resorts and
Clubs Private Limited for which the petitioner stood as a guarantor.
Therefore, it is his contention that as per Section 171 of the Indian Contract
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.30146 of 2011
Act, general lien cannot be exercised. In support of his contention, relied
on the judgment in State Bank of India rep. by its Branch Manager,
Kothagiri Branch, Nilgiris and another Vs. Jayanthi and others
reported in [2011] 2 CTC 46 [DB].
5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit
that the petitioner is already party before the Debt Recovery Tribunal and
the subject property is also shown in the schedule. It is a clear case of the
bank that the petitioner stood as a guarantor for the mortgage loan availed
by Vantage Resorts and Clubs Private Limited and recovery certificate has
also been issued for Rs.4,85,54,271.30. Hence, submitted that the above
proceedings has reached finality and now the petitioner cannot contend that
it is only a general lien exercised by the bank. Therefore, submitted that
the present Writ Petition is not maintainable.
6. No doubt the judgment cited by the petitioner has dealt with as to
when general lien can be exercised. In the above case, despite clearing of
the loan by the petitioner/husband, the bank exercised general lien in
respect of the other loan where the petitioner/husband has not deposited the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.30146 of 2011
title deeds and considering the scope of Section 171 of the Indian Contract
Act, this Court had held that the bank cannot retain the document since the
loan, for which he has deposited the title deeds, has been repaid. Whereas,
it is the specific contention of the respondent that a mortgage deed was
executed in respect of the home loan availed by the Vantage Resorts &
Clubs Pvt Limited for which the petitioner also executed security and
mortgage in respect of the above loan. According to them this issue is
already the subject matter before the Debt Recovery Tribunal in O.A.No.1
of 2012 and a copy of the Order has also been produced before this Court.
7. A perusal of the Order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal in
O.A.No.1 of 2012 indicate that the writ petitioner has been made as a fifth
defendant in the above application. The above Order further makes it clear
that no plea has been taken by the petitioner with regard to security for the
mortgage said been executed by the petitioner for the Vantage Resorts Club
Private Limited. The only contention with regard to the payment of
instalment has been raised. Considering the entire circumstances, the
above application has been allowed and recovery certificate has been issued
for a sum of Rs.4,85,54,271.30 with interest from 27.09.2019 till the date
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.30146 of 2011
of realisation. When the very document was put in question before the
recovery proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal and the same was
not questioned, now the petitioner cannot contend that there is no collateral
security or the mortgage executed by him. When the documents of the
petitioner was relied upon by the bank, which is also the subject matter of
the issue and decided and reached its finality, now it is premature to
contend that those documents have not been executed as collateral security.
In such view of the matter, direction cannot be given to the bank to return
of the documents and I do not find any merits in this Writ Petition.
8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
14.10.2022
Index:Yes/No
Web:Yes/No
Speaking/Non Speaking
vrc
To,
1. The Chief Manager
Andhra Bank, T.T.K.Road,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.30146 of 2011
Chennai – 600 018.
2. The Assistant General Manager,
Andhra Bank, T.T.K.Road,
Chennai – 600 018.
3. The Chairman and Managing Director,
Andhra Bank, No.5-9-11, Salfabad,
Dr.Pattabi Bhawan, Hyderabad,
Andhra Pradesh – 500 004.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.30146 of 2011
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
vrc
WP.No.30146 of 2011
14.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
