Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal

High Court Upholds Right to Summon Records in Banking Dispute: Sets Aside Lower Court’s Dismissal

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a notable judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, led by Hon’ble Justice Karamjit Singh, has set a precedent in a banking dispute case involving Lekh Ram and the State Bank of India. The court overturned a lower court’s decision that had denied the petitioner’s request to summon the Branch Manager of the respondent bank with crucial documents.

Justice Singh, in his observation, emphasized the petitioner’s rights, stating, “The petitioner has every right to establish his defence by summoning the concerned record which is lying in the office of respondent Bank.” This statement underlines the importance of allowing parties in a dispute to access necessary documents for their defense, especially in complex financial cases.

The dispute originated from a recovery suit filed by the State Bank of India against Lekh Ram for an alleged default on a credit facility. The petitioner contested this claim, asserting regular interest payments and highlighting a related dispute over insurance premium payments handled by the bank.

In a previous hearing, the lower court had dismissed the petitioner’s application to summon the bank manager and specific documents, citing that the petitioner failed to establish their relevance during the cross-examination of the bank’s official who had appeared as a witness. Challenging this decision, the petitioner approached the High Court.

The High Court’s decision, parting ways with the lower court’s judgment, granted the petitioner the permission to summon the relevant bank official along with specified documents. However, the court excluded the KYC norms of the respondent bank from this directive. Justice Singh clarified, “The exact relevancy of the documents could be assessed only after going through their contents.”

Further, the High Court directed that a different bank official, other than the one who had already testified, could be summoned with the records. This move ensures that the petitioner’s right to a fair trial and defense is upheld.

In his concluding remarks, Justice Singh stated, “Any observations made hereinabove are not to be considered as opinion on merits of case.” This statement highlights the court’s neutral stance on the case’s outcome while ensuring procedural fairness.

Date of Decision: 29.11.2023

Lekh Ram VS State Bank Of India

Latest Legal News