Disposed

Earthcon Constructions Private Limited v. Ombudsman Reserve Bank of India, & Ors.

Delhi HC5 Jul 2024W.P.(C)/9066/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by a company whose title deeds were withheld by Canara Bank after full loan repayment, despite NOC and closure letter. With proceedings pending before the Banking Ombudsman, the High Court disposed of the petition directing the Ombudsman to decide the complaint within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to RBI Ombudsman to decide the petitioner's complaint within two weeks; dasti copy of order granted.

Earthcon Constructions Private Limited Vs Ombudsman… — Banking and Recovery | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~84

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 9066/2024

¶4

EARTHCON CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED

¶5

.....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Ms. Soumya Kumar, Adv.

¶7

versus

¶8

OMBUDSMAN RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, & ORS.

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

Through: Ms. Abhilasha Sharma, Adv. for R-1 None for R-2/Canara Bank Mid Corporate Branch

¶11

CORAM:

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

% 05.07.2024

¶15

This hearing is being conducted through hybrid mode.

¶16

CM APPL. 37077/2024 (Ex.)

¶17

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶18

The application stands disposed of.

¶19

W.P.(C) 9066/2024

¶20

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of an appropriate writ in respect of the inaction on the part of the respondents to withhold the title deeds with regard to the property submitted by them at the time the loan was advanced.

¶21

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 is present on advance notice.

¶22

None appeared on behalf of respondent No.2/Canara Bank Mid

¶23

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/07/2025 at 10:30:51

¶24

Corporate Branch, despite sending advance notice. Respondent No.2 is stated to be the main contesting party.

¶25

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is manifest that the petitioner company has made in full, the payment of the loan amount and an NOC has also been issued apart from the loan closure letter by respondent No.2. 8. At this stage, although no interim relief is claimed, it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the documents in question are required for availing a loan from the Swamih Investment Fund, with regard to which she has alluded to the letter dated 08.02.2024.

¶26

It is also brought out that the proceedings are pending before the Ombudsman. 10. Evidently, a complaint has been filed before the Ombudsman on 24.04.2024. It is submitted that the despite giving several opportunities to respondent No.2/Canara Bank to release the documents in question, the officials have delayed the matter and the relevant documents have not been released. In this regard, she has also alluded to another letter dated 14.05.2024, whereby the petitioner was informed that they are at liberty to come to the Bank and collect the papers.

¶27

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with the direction to the Ombudsman to decide the complaint of the petitioner within two weeks from today.

¶28

A copy of this order be given dasti .

¶29

DHARMESH SHARMA, J.

¶30

JULY 05, 2024 sp

¶31

Earthcon Constructions Private Limited v. Ombudsman Reserve Bank of India, & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Earthcon Constructions Private Limited v. Ombudsman Reserve Bank of India, & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akash Gupta Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Sarika Devi Vs Director General Cisf and Others

Shri Naveen Kumar Bhardwaj Vs District and Session Judge Nw and Anr.

Nirankar Saxena Vs Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry & Anr.

Ayushman Bajpai Vs University of Delhi & Ors.

Saurav Beverages Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Cgst, Delhi (East) & Ors.

Gurinder Singh Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Manoj Kumar Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mohit Vats Vs Smt. Sheetal Vats

Arun Kumar Sharma Vs Sharif Ahmed Alias Babbu

Balvinder Singh Vs Prem Sapra & Anr.

Smt. Bindiya K. Pujji Vs Shri Sandeep Kapur

Mrs Sharifan Vs Cl Meena

Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee Vs Delhi Development Authority and Ors.