NAGENDRA RAM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this writ application has, inter alia, prayed for issuarance of a writ of or in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to release the additional guarantee furnished by the petitioner in respect of the term loan sanctioned in favour of the respondent No. 6 and hand over the registered Sale deed with regard to Plot No. 229 appertaining to Khatian No. 737, Tangra, J.L. No. 5, Touzi No. 1298/2833, P.S. Tiljala, measuring 8 cattahas 3 chittaks.

(2.) The fact that the petitioner stood as a guarantor of respondent No. 6 is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner furnished an additional sucurity. According to the petitioner, from the letters dated 2.3.94 and 8.3.94 as contained in annexures "A" and "B" to she writ application respectively it would appear that the respondent Bank was clearly informed that the said additional guarantee was valid for a period of one year from date. The petitioner further contends that by a letter dated 7th December, 1994 as contained in annexure "C" to the writ application the respondent Bank intimated the petitioner that credit facilities are given to M/s. Fine Art Export to the tune of Rs. 684.15 lacs whereas according to the petitioner he stood guarantor only for a sum of Rs. 15 lakhs. The petitioner in terms of his letter dated 21.12.94 informed the respondent Bank that as his liability was for one year only, his guarantee has come to an end on the expiry of the said period and the respondent Bank in terms of the letter dated 15.3.96 as contained in annexure "E" to the writ application was this requested to hand over the Title Deeds to the petitioner.

(3.) An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of the respondent Bank wherein in has annexed two documents, namely, Deed of Guarantees executed by the petitioner on 11.3.94 and a letter dated 14.2.95 as contained in annexure "A" and "B" respectively thereto.