Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 133079 (MAD)

The Bank Manager v. R.Tamilarasan

WA(MD)/1010/2025 · 2025-08-08

G R Swaminathan, K Rajasekar

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

W.A.(MD)No.1010 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 08.08.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR W.A.(MD)No.1010 of 2025 and C.M.P.(MD)No.6384 of 2025 The Bank Manager, Indian Bank, Sannathi Street, Thiruvanaikovil, Trichy -5. ... Appellant Vs. 1.R.Tamilarasan 2.The Secretary, Banking Ombudsman, Reserve Bank of India, Fort Glacis, 16, Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001. 3.The Manager, Reliance Assets Reconstruction Company Ltd., Registered and Corporate Office, 11th Floor - North Slide, R-Tech Park, Western Express Highway, Goregan (East), Mumbai - 400 063. ... Respondents 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.1010 of 2025 Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent, to allow the writ appeal by setting aside the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.27738 of 2024 dated 28.01.2025 on the file of this Court. For Appellant : Mr.C.Karthik For Respondents : Ms.R.Yamuna for R1 JUDGMENT (By G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) Heard both sides. 2.The appellant bank figured as the second respondent in the writ petition. The writ petition was filed by the first respondent herein for directing the bank to issue no objection certificate. The writ petitioner had availed educational loan from the appellant / bank. The account became NPA. The account was transferred to Reliance Assets Reconstruction Company Limited. Subsequently, by way of one time settlement, the account was settled. Since even thereafter no objection certificate was not issued, the writ petitioner was constrained to go before Banking Ombudsman followed by filing of the writ petition. The 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.1010 of 2025 learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition but levied cost of Rs.5,000/- on the bank as well as Reliance Assets Reconstruction Company Limited. It appears that the case was once again sought to be mentioned before the learned Single Judge. At that stage, the cost was increased to Rs.10,000/-. 3.It is now submitted that no objection certificate has subsequently been issued by the third respondent on 09.06.2025. Taking note of the subsequent development, we set aside the additional cost of Rs.5,000/- imposed on the appellant. The writ appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (G.R.S. J.,) & (K.R.S. J.,) 08.08.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.(MD)No.1010 of 2025 G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. and K.RAJASEKAR, J. ias W.A.(MD)No.1010 of 2025 08.08.2025 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis