Indian Veterinary Journal Vs the Manager — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Indian Veterinary Journal Vs the Manager — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent bank (State Bank of India, Chamiers Road Branch) to forthwith defreeze savings account SB No.30281291710 and permit the petitioner to operate it; the 2nd respondent left free to prosecute its pending I.A.No.4 of 2021 for interim injunction before the Court below, with the petitioner free to file its counter; no costs imposed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the 1st respondent bank acted lawfully in stopping/freezing the petitioner's operation of its bank account merely upon receipt of the 2nd respondent's communication stating that a suit was pending, without any restraint order from a court.

Court's answer

A bank cannot stop a customer from operating its bank account merely on a third-party communication that a suit is pending; the bank should insist on a restraint order from the Court and, in the absence of one, should at least have informed the petitioner of the communication and asked for its response; if a mere communication sufficed, it would lead to adverse consequences.

Ratio / Principle

The action taken by the 1st respondent bank in freezing/stopping the petitioner's account is illegal and unsustainable and is liable to be interfered with by this Court.

Key takeaways

Directed the 1st respondent bank to forthwith defreeze the bank account and permit the petitioner to operate it; the 2nd respondent, if it wants restraint over the account, is left free to pursue its pending interlocutory application (I.A.No.4 of 2021) before the Court below, with the petitioner entitled to file its counter, to be decided by the Court on its own merits and in accordance with law (leave-open clause recast by the correction order dated 10.09.2025).ratio¶30
Mention-order dated 10.09.2025: paragraphs 7 and 9 of the order dated 21.08.2025 were corrected to record that the 2nd respondent had filed I.A.No.4 of 2021 seeking interim injunction before the Court below, and to recast the leave-open direction so that the 2nd respondent is left open to prosecute the pending interlocutory application and seek for an interlocutory order; Registry directed to issue corrected order copy to the parties.ratio¶62

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bank freezing account on a private letter without court restraint order held illegal - account ordered defrozen. High Court of Judicature at Madras (N. Anand Venkatesh, J.; W.P.No.23856 of 2025, decided 21.08.2025): The petitioner (Indian Veterinary Journal) challenged the impugned letter dated 20.05.2025 of the 1st respondent bank, which had frozen its savings account SB No.30281291710 after the 2nd respondent (Indian Veterinary Association) communicated on 12.2.2025 that suit OS.No.5548 of 2021 was pending before the XV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. Holding: a mere communication citing a pending suit cannot justify a bank stopping operation of an account; the bank should insist on a restraint order from the Court and, at the least, inform the customer of the communication and seek its response; failing this, adverse consequences would follow. The bank's action was declared illegal and unsustainable, and the Court directed it to forthwith defreeze the account and permit the petitioner to operate it. By a mention-order dated 10.09.2025, paragraphs 7 and 9 were corrected to record that the 2nd respondent had actually filed I.A.No.4 of 2021 seeking interim injunction before the Court below, and that the 2nd respondent is left open to prosecute that pending application, with the petitioner entitled to file its counter and the matter to be decided on its own merits in accordance with law. Writ disposed of; no costs.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

W.P.No.23856 of 2025

Indian Veterinary Journal Official Organ of The Indian Veterinary Association (Reg.96/1967) Rep. by its Authorised Signatory S.Meenakshi Sundaram Head Office No.11 Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar Salai Chamiers Road, Nandanam Chennai 600 035. .. Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Manager State Bank of India Chamiers Road Branch No.28, Pasumpon Devar Salai Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.

2.Indian Veterinary Association (Regn No.S/2093/2019) Represented by its President Dr.Umesh Chandra Sharma I Floor, Street No.Tis Hazari Near St.Stephens Hospital Ground Delhi-110054. .. Respondents

1/6

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

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the letter issued by the 1st respondent dated 20.05.2025 and quash the same as illegal incompetent and arbitrary and further direct the 1st respondent to activate the account of the Indian Veterinary Journal having, Savings Account SB No.30281291710, and for consequential orders.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Sunny Sheen

For Respondents : Mr.Jayakumar for R1 Ms.A.Pramila for R2

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned communication issued by the 1st respondent dated 20.5.2025 and for a consequential direction to the 1st respondent to permit the petitioner to operate the bank account in SB No.30281291710.

2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

3.The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the 1st respondent bank has acted upon the communication received from the 2nd respondent dated 12.2.2025 to the effect that a suit has been filed in O.S.No.5548 of 2021 and the same is pending before the XV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai and hence the petitioner should not be

2/6

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

permitted to operate the bank account. On the basis of this communication, the 1st respondent has freezed the bank account of the petitioner.

4.The 2nd respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The 2nd respondent has taken a stand that the petitioner does not have the right to operate the bank account and that already a substantive suit is pending in OS.No.5548 of 2021, before the XV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai and one of the relief that has been sought for in this suit is for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner in any manner from operating or using the name of the 2nd respondent in logo, seal or its letterhead. The 2nd respondent has also challenged the election notification published on 31.3.2019 and to declare the election of the office bearers as null and void. According to the 2nd respondent, if the petitioner is permitted to operate the bank account before the 1st respondent bank, it will cause grave prejudice to the 2nd respondent. Therefore, notice was issued to the 1st respondent and the 1st respondent has acted upon the same.

5.The learned counsel for the 1st respondent submitted that the 1st respondent bank has acted upon the communication received from the 2nd respondent and that they will abide by any orders passed by this Court.

3/6

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

6.This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and the materials available on record.

7.The petitioner and the 2nd respondent are at loggerheads and a suit is pending in OS.No.5548 of 2021, before the XV Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai. If the 2nd respondent wants to restrain the petitioner from operating the bank accounts before the 1st respondent bank, they should have been filed an IA before the concerned Court and sought for interim relief. With the available materials before this Court, it is not clear as to whether any such interlocutory application has been filed before the Court. Merely because a suit is pending, a notice cannot be issued to the bank to stop the petitioner from operating the bank account and the bank should not have acted upon the same. If a mere communication is enough for a bank to stop the operation of a bank account stating that the suit is pending, it will lead to adverse consequences. The bank should have insisted for a restraint order from the Court and in the absence of the same, the bank should have atleast informed the petitioner that they have received a communication from the 2nd respondent and asked for the response of the petitioner. Straightaway, the 1st respondent has acted upon the communication received from the 2nd respondent and stopped the petitioner from operating the bank account.

8.The action taken on the part of the 1st respondent bank is illegal and unsustainable and the same is liable to be interfered by this Court. 4/6

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

9.In the light of the above discussion, there shall be a direction to the 1st respondent bank to forthwith defreeze the bank account and permit the petitioner to operate the bank account. If the 2nd respondent wants to restrain the operation of the bank account, it is left open to the 2nd respondent to file an appropriate application before the Court and seek for an interlocutory order and on such application being filed, the petitioner can always file their counter and it will be decided by the Court on its own merits and in accordance with law.

10.In the result, this writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

21.08.2025

Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No kp

5/6

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

kp

N. ANAND VENKATESH., J

To

1.The Manager State Bank of India Chamiers Road Branch No.28, Pasumpon Devar Salai Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.

2.Indian Veterinary Association (Regn No.S/2093/2019) Represented by its President Dr.Umesh Chandra Sharma I Floor, Street No.Tis Hazari Near St.Stephens Hospital Ground Delhi-110054.

W.P.No.23856 of 2025

21.08.2025

6/6

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

Writ Petition No.23856 of 2025

Indian Veterinary Journal, Official organ of The Indian Veterinary Association (Reg, 96/1967) Represented by its Authorised Signatory, S.Meenakshi Sundaram, Head Office, No.11, Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar Salai, Chamiers Road, Nandanam, Chennai - 600 035. ... Petitioner vs.

The Manager, State Bank of India, Chamiers Road Branch, No.28, Pasumpon Devar Salai, Nandanam Chennai - 600 035 & Anr. ... Respondents

For Petitioner : Ms.V.Srimathi

For Respondents : Mr.A.K.L.Jayakamal Rayudu [R1]

Mr.P.Netaji [R2]

O R D E R

7/6

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

Today, the matter is listed under the caption 'for being mentioned' at the instance of learned counsel for the second respondent.

In paragraph 7 of the order dated 21.08.2025, the fifth line should read as

"With the available materials before this Court, it is seen that the second respondent has filed interlocutory application in I.A.No.4 of 2021 seeking for relief of interim injunction before the Court below", instead of "With the available materials before this Court, it is not clear as to whether any such interlocutory application has been filed before the Court."

In paragraph 9 of the order dated 21.08.2025, the last three lines should read as "If the 2nd respondent wants to restrain the operation of the bank account, it is left open to the second respondent to prosecute the pending interlocutory application before the Court below and seek for an interlocutory order. The petitioner can always file their counter and it will be decided by the Court on its own merits and in accordance with law.", instead of "If the 2nd respondent wants to restrain the operation of the bank account, it is left open to the 2nd respondent to file an appropriate application before the Court and seek for an interlocutory order and on such application being filed, the petitioner can always file their

8/6

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

counter and it will be decided by the Court on its own merits and in accordance with law."

Registry is directed to issue corrected order copy to the parties.

10.09.2025

mp

To

The Manager, State Bank of India, Chamiers Road Branch, No.28, Pasumpon Devar Salai, Nandanam Chennai - 600 035.

Indian Veterinary Association, (regn No.S/2093/2019) Represented by its President, Dr.Umesh Chandra Sharma, I Floor, Street No. Tis Hazari, Near St. Stephens Hospital Ground, Delhi - 110 054.

9/6

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

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J

mp

Writ Petition No.23856 of 2025

10.09.2025

10/6

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