Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3198 (JHR)

SHEOJI SINGH v. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER

WPC/228/2025 · 2025-03-11

Rajesh Shankar

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 W.P.(C) No.228 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 228 of 2025 --- Sheoji Singh son of Jagdish Singh, resident of Shivjee Singh Building, Dimna Road, Mango, Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum … … Petitioner Versus 1. Indian Overseas Bank represented through its General Manager, Bistupur, Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum 2. Madhusudan Builders & Developers Private Limited, represented through its Director having its office at 139, Tripaty Bhawan, New Baradwari, P.O. & P.S.- Baradwari, District- East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur …. … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate (through online mode) Ms. Puja Agarwal, Advocate For the Resp. No. 1 : Mr. Deepak Kumar Bharti, Advocate Mr. Manindra Kumar Sinha, Advocate Order No. 06 Dated: 11.03.2025 The present case is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no. 1-Bank to release the petitioner from the liabilities/responsibilities as guarantor of the cash credit facility (cash credit account no. 042402000000566) issued in favour of the respondent no. 2-Company. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though various representations have been given to the respondent no. 1 for releasing the petitioner from the responsibility of guarantor of the aforesaid cash credit account, however no decision has been taken by the said respondent which has compelled the petitioner to prefer the present writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 submits that if the petitioner prefers a fresh representation on the present issue, an 2 W.P.(C) No.228 of 2025 appropriate decision in accordance with law will be taken by the said respondent within a time frame. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of prayer made by the petitioner in the present writ petition, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer a fresh representation on the present issue before the respondent no. 1. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no. 1, after verifying the relevant records and on providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the respondent no. 2, shall take an appropriate informed decision within six weeks from the date of filing of the said representation. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid liberty and direction. (Rajesh Shankar, J.) Ritesh/