Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Telangana
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Gampa Mallesham vs Indian Bank Corporate Office

High Court Of Telangana|09 June, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.15661 of 2014 Dated : 09.06.2014 Between:
Gampa Mallesham, S/o Shivvaiah, 58 yrs., R/o H.No.2-29, Nittoor Village, Peddapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District.
.. Petitioner And Indian Bank Corporate Office, 254/260, Avvai Shnmugham Salai, Chennai rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director and three others .. Respondents This Court made the following :
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.15661 of 2014 ORDER :
The case of the petitioner in this writ petition is that he is one of the partners in the partnership firm viz., M/s.Vasavi Cotton Industries, Nimmanapali Village, Peddapalli Mandal, Karimnagar District and the said partnership firm is not running properly and the members of the partnership firm are not maintaining the accounts properly, which is causing great hardship to the petitioner. The petitioner avers that he entered into the deed of partnership on 20.02.2009 and he is having 10% share in the said firm. In 2009, he opened the accounts bearing Nos.826402340 and 84939589 in the Indian Bank in the name of Vasavi Cotton Industries. The Bank has granted MTL loan of Rs.2,20,00,000/- and OCC loan of Rs.3,00,00,000/-. The properties of the petitioner were pledged as security for obtaining the loan. Subsequently, the parties are not operating the partnership firm in proper manner and now the partners are stating that the partnership firm is incurring losses and they are demanding that the petitioner shall pay an additional amount. The petitioner apprehends that due to the illegality committed by the partners of the partnership firm, wrong accounts are prepared. In the said manner, they are also likely to take away the amounts standing in the bank accounts mentioned above and in such an event, great prejudice would be caused to the petitioner since he has pledged his properties as security while obtaining loan. Ventilating his grievance, the petitioner submitted a representation to the Zonal Manager, Indian Bank, Hyderabad on 03.06.2014, but no action has been taken by the bank so far. On the contrary, the petitioner apprehends that the partners are going to withdraw the amounts lying in the bank account. Hence, this writ petition is instituted praying to issue a direction to the respondent bank to stop the operations in bank accounts mentioned above as per the representation submitted by the petitioner on 03.06.2014.
2. As rightly stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the partnership deed is in existence and the petitioner continuous to be a partner. According to partnership deed, there is a person authorised to operate the bank account of the firm. The bank account was opened based on the partnership deed and the account opening form indicates persons, who are authorised to operate the bank account. Unless and until there is a change in the partnership deed and a decision is taken by the partnership firm withdrawing the authorisation to the person who is initially authorised and as long as entries in the opening of bank accounts records continuous to disclose the name of the persons, who are authorised to operate the bank account on behalf of the partnership firm, the action of the bank in permitting to operate the bank accounts cannot be found fault with. Hence, in exercise of the power of judicial review under Article 226 of Constitution of India, no mandamus can be issued directing the bank to withhold the operations in the bank accounts.
3. Therefore, the Writ Petition is not maintainable and the same is accordingly dismissed. If the petitioner has grievance with reference to the functioning of partnership firm, he is at liberty to avail appropriate remedies under law. However, it is made clear that observations made in the order are only for the purpose of disposal of the writ petition. This order does not preclude the bank to act on the representation of the petitioner dated 03.06.2014 as warranted by law. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO Date : 09.06.2014 Note : Issue C.C. in two days.
(B/o) ssp
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Gampa Mallesham vs Indian Bank Corporate Office

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
09 June, 2014
Judges
  • P Naveen Rao