Disposed¶29

Hrushikesh Routray v. Canara Bank

Orissa HC11 Feb 2025WP(C)/1302/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

No Due Certificate; return of mortgage/title documents; delayed release of property documents; Canara Bank Salipur Branch Cuttack; loan repayment prior to auction sale; RBI guideline dated 13th September 2023; compensation Rs.5,000 per day of delay from 10.08.2024; High Court of Orissa; Dr. Justice S.K. Panigrahi; W.P.(C) No.1302 of 2025; writ petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Opposite Parties/Bank to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- per day of delay as per the RBI guideline dated 13th September, 2023, from 10.08.2024 until the filing of the Writ Petition; Writ Petition disposed of. ¶29

Hrushikesh Routray Vs Canara Bank — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.1302 of 2025

¶2

Hrushikesh Routray

¶3

…. Petitioner

¶4

Represented By Adv. Mr. Swayam Prabhu Jena

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Canara Bank & Anr.

¶7

…. Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. Mr. Arupa Nanda Das

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

ORDER

Order

11.02.2025

No.

1 . This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶16

2. Heard.

¶17

3. The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking a direction from this Court to the Opposite Parties for issuance of No Due Certificate and the original land documents submitted at the time of availing of the loan in question in his favour. He further prays for grant of compensation with effect from 11.07.2024.

¶18

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has taken a loan of Rs.5,00,000/- from the Canara Bank, Salipur Branch, Cuttack mortgaging his homestead land having Plot No.2299/2787 of Khata

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

No.840/287. The Petitioner repaid the loan amount along with interest prior to the date fixed for auction sale.

¶22

5. He further submits that despite clearance of the loan outstanding dues and submission of an application before the concerned authority of the Opposite Parties/Bank since 10.07.2024, the Petitioner is still awaiting to get the above noted documents.

¶23

6. He further draws attention of this Court to the fact that the Opposite Parties/Bank has failed to follow the Reserve Bank of India guidelines which is strict on the matter of return of documents and issuance of ‘No Due Certificate’ within a reasonable time. In the present Case, though the present Petitioner has approached the Opposite Parties/Bank for quite some time, it has failed to return the documents.

¶24

7. The compensation for delayed release of the property documents has been well captured by the RBI guideline considering the long standing dissatisfaction among the customers on the issue of non-returning of the documents on time. In the present case also, the Banking authority has demonstrated such delay.

¶25

8. In such view of the matter, the Opposite Parties/Bank is directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- for each day of

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

// 3 //

¶28

delay as per the guideline dated 13^th September, 2023 issued by the Reserve Bank of India from 10.08.2024 to till the filing of the present Writ Petition.

¶29

9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶30

(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)

¶31

Judge

¶32

Sumitra

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMITRA NAYAK Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 12-Feb-2025 17:57:27

¶35

Page 3 of 3

Hrushikesh Routray v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hrushikesh Routray v. Canara Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rabindra Ku.Das Vs Sanjukta Das

Somanath Nayak Vs State

Chintamani Puhan Vs State of Odisha

Kalpana Mahapatra@Jhun Vs State of Orissa

Uttam Kumar Poddor Vs Union of India

Ashok Kumar Mukherjee Vs Union of India