Disposed

M/s. Riha Sea Foods v. M/s. Icici Bank

Madras HC12 Dec 2024WP(MD)/28040/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed seeking a direction to de-freeze a bank account after the bank received a notice for a criminal investigation. The bank had frozen the account on the order of the Courts and there was insufficient money to meet the demand. The court disposed of the petition directing the bank to re-freeze the account.

What did the court decide?

Direction to re-freeze Bank Account No. 054505012139 but to impose a lien for the demanded amount of Rs.18,00,056/-

M/s. Riha Sea Foods Vs M/s. Icici Bank — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.28040 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated : 12.12.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.28040 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD)No.23788 of 2024

¶7

Riha Sea Foods, Represented by its Sole Proprietor, Mr.P.Mohaideen, Registered Office at No.3/201, East Street, Keelakarai, Ramanathapuram – 623 517.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.ICICI Bank,

¶11

Represented by its Branch Manager, Keelakarai Branch, No.29, Main Road, Keelakarai, Ramanathapuram – 623 517.

¶12

2.Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Represented by its Secretary, New Delhi.

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to de freeze the petitioner's Bank Account No.054505012139, maintained in the 1^st respondent Bank.

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

1/4

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.28040 of 2024

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.G.R.Balakumar For 1^st Respondent : Mr.S.Krishnan For M/s.Acvity Law Association For 2^nd Respondent : Mr.G.Vidha Maheswaran, Standing Counsel

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This Writ Petition is filed, seeking to direct the respondent Bank to de freeze the petitioner's Bank Account No.054505012139, maintained in the 1 st respondent Bank.

¶21

2 .Heard the learned counsels on either side and carefully perused the entire materials available on record.

¶22

3.When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the 1 st respondent on instructions submitted that the Bank had received notice under Sections 94 and 106 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, from the Inspector of Police, Rewari, Harayana, requesting to suspend all the debit service of the petitioner's account and withhold a sum of Rs.18,00,056/-. Further it is required that in the absence of such amount available in the petitioner's account, the second respondent had required to impose a lien on the said amount and inform the account holder in this regard.

¶23

4.The learned counsel for the 1 st respondent further submitted that

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

2/4

¶26

W.P.(MD)No.28040 of 2024

¶27

amount of Rs.4,765/- is available in the petitioner's account.

¶28

5.In view of the same, directing the 1 st respondent to impose a lien for an amount of Rs.18,00,056/- with respect to the petitioner's bank account No.054505012139, this Writ Petition is dismissed and the first respondent is directed to defreeze the petitioner's Bank account No. 054505012139, imposing the lien for the aforementioned amount. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶29

12.12.2024

¶30

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Mrn

¶31

¶32

1.Branch Manager, ICICI Bank, Keelakarai Branch, No.29, Main Road, Keelakarai, Ramanathapuram – 623 517.

¶33

2.Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Represented by its Secretary, New Delhi.

¶34

3/4

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

W.P.(MD)No.28040 of 2024

¶37

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

¶38

Mrn

¶39

W.P.(MD)No.28040 of 2024

¶40

12.12.2024

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/4

M/s. Riha Sea Foods v. M/s. Icici Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Riha Sea Foods v. M/s. Icici Bank

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

Arjuna Raja Vs The Director of Town and Country Planning

A.Kalavathy Vs The Executive Engineer

Mani Balan Vs The Branch Manager

S.Pavinan Vs The Government of Tamilnadu

A.Vithya Vijayalakshmi, Vs the Member Secretary

P. Ramamoorthy Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer