WP/29898/2025 of Vibha Kakade Vs Reserve Bank of India on 7 January 2026

1. Vibha Kakade, D/o.RavinderKakade, Aged 40 years, Currently residing at Flat No. 506, 7 Block, Silicon Ridge Apartments, Rajpushpa Apartments, RajendraNagar, Attapur, Hyderabad - 500048.

2. tVlanjula Kakade, W/o.RavinderKakade Aged 66 years, Currently residing at. Flat No. 506, 7th Block, Silicon Ridge Apartments, Rajpushpa Apartments,

3. Ravinder Kakade, S/o.[\tlahadevRaoKakade Aged 72 years, Currentlyresidingat. Flat No. 506, 7th Block, Silicon Ridge Apartments, Rajpushpa Apartments, RajendraNagar, Attapur, Hyderabad -500048. .....PETITIONERS AND

1. Reserve Bank of lndia, Fourth Floor, Amar Building, SirPttI Road, f\Iumbai- 400001.

2. Banking Ombudsman, Reserye Bank of lndia, Banking Ombudsman Office, 6- 1 -56, Secretariat Road, Saifabad, Hyderabad-500004.

3. Dealing Officer, Reserve Bank of lndia, Banking Ombudsman Office-ll, Fort Glacis, Chennai, Tamil Nadu- 600001.

4. Banking Ombudsman, lClCl Bank Limited,34l,Arihant Apartment, Railway Colony, Ward 1 24, Gand hid ham, G uj arat-37 0201 . lVlanager, Complex

6. Bank.Manager, lClCl Bank Limited, Rajendranagar, 4-3-1431A. BPR Towers, Attapur, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500048 .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or a direction more so in the nature of Writ of o

5. Bank Kurla ICICI Bank Limited Head Office, lclcl Bank towers, Bandra- Mumbai - 400 051.

Mandamus (i) declaring the action of the Respondents in not releasing the no dues certificate for Home Loan bearing A/c No. LBANJ00OO5760999 and tifle deeds of the property bearing Flat No. 506, Silicon Ridge, Attapur Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Sy. No. 44o, Part 441 AA 47oAAa4Jl, Hyderabad- 500048 which was mortgaged with lClCl Bank for a Home Loan bearing A/c No. L84I1J00005760999, even though the Petitioners have cleared all dues in connection with the Home Loan bearing Alc No. LBANJ00005Z60ggg on 24.06.2024 as illegal, arbitrary and violation of fundamental rights of the petitioner more particularly Article 21 of the Constitution of lndia and other Iegal rights of the Petitioner and Consequently direct the Respondents No.6 bank to release the no dues certificate for Home Loan bearing A/c No. LBANJ0O00S760999 and tile deeds of the property bearing Flat No. 506, Silicon Ridge, Attapur Village, Rajendra Nagar [vandal, Ranga Reddy District, Sy. No. 440, parl441 AA 47oAAa 471, Hyderabad-500048 which was mortgaged with lClCl Bank. (ii) To set aside the Response dated 26.08.2024- and Reply dated 24.10.2024-by Reserve Bank of lndia as being unconstitutional, arbitrary and against the well settled principles of law. (i) Direct the Respondents to pay an amount of Rs. Rs. 22,2s,000 (Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Only) for 455 d Responsible Lending conduct- Release of Movable/lmmovable property Documents on Repayment/Settlement of Personal Loans. !;A.NO:1 OF 2025 Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct Respondents No. 6 bank to release the no dues certificate for Home Loan bearing A/c No. L8ANJ00005760999 and title deeds of the property bearing Flat No. 506, Silicon Ridge, Attapur Village, Rajendra Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Sy. No. 440, Part 441 AA 4704 Ae 471, Hydeiabad : 500048 which was -mortgaged with lClCl Bank for a Home Loan bearing A/c No. LBANJ000OS760999 within a period of 15 days. a

!.A.NO:2 OF 2025 Petition UnderSection 15'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent Nos.3, 4 to 6 to consider the representations of 28.10.2024, . 28402924 and U1'.2O24 within a period of 10 days pending disposal of the writ petition. |.A.NO:3 OF 2025 Between:

1. Vibha Kakade, D/o.RavinderKakade, Aged 40 years, Currently residing at Flat No. 506, 7 Block, Silicon Ridge Apartments, Raipushpa Apartments,

2. Manjula Kakade, Wo.RavinderKakade Aged 66 years, Cunently residing at. Flat No. 506, 7th Block, Silicon Ridge Apartments, Rajpushpa Apartments, RajendraNagar, Attapur, Hyderabad - 500048.

3. Ravinder Kakade, S/o.MahadevRaoKakade Aged 72 years, Currentlyresidingat. Flat No. 506, 7th Block, Silicon Ridge Apartments, Rajpushpa Apartments, RajendraNagar, Attapur, Hyderabad -500048. .....PETITIONERS AND

1. Reserve Bank of lndia, Fourth Floor, Amar Building, SirPM Road, Mumbai- 400001 .

2. Banking Ombudsman, Reserve Bank of lndia, Banking Ombudsman Office, 6-1 -56, Secretariat Road, Saifabad, Hyderabad-500004.

3. Dealing Officer, Reserve Bank of lndia, Banking Ombudsman Office-ll, Fort Glacis, Chennai, Tamil Nadu- 600001.

4. Banking Ombudsman, lClCl Bank Limited,34l,Arihant Apartment, Railway Colony, Ward 12A, Gandhidham,Gujarat-37O2O1 .

5. Bank Manager, lClCl Bank Limited Head Office, lClCl Bank towers, Bandra-Kurla Complbx Mumbai - 400'051.

6. Bank Manager, lClCl Bank Limited, Rajendranagar, 4-3-143iA, BPR Towers, Attapur, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500048. .....RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

7. Mr. Vimal Suhag, S/o.Azad Singh, aged 41 years, C-1104, Nilgiri Apartments, Off Military Road, Bamandayapada, Marol, Andheri East Mumbai, Maharastrar - 400072. a

.....PROPOSED RESPONDENT No.7/RESPONDENT Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to implead Respondent No. 7 herein as Respondent No. 7 in WP No. 29898 of 2025. Gounsel for the Petitioners : M/s VALA SRIHITHA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : SRI G.KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.S & 6 : -- The Court made the following ORDER a

e-"r' IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI{A trIRIT PETITION No. 29A9A OF 2o25 07.01.20/26 Between: Vibha Kakade & two others Petitioners And Reserve Bank of India & five others ..... Respondents

ORDER:

Petitioner No.1 (co-applicant) with her ex-husband Mr. Vimar Suhag (principal borrower) had availed home loan of Rs.27.5O lacs with ICICI Bank, Gandhidham Branch, Gujarat for which petitioners 2 and 3, parents of petitioner No.l stood as guarantors and also mortgaged the propert5r bearing Flat No. 506, Silicon. Ridge, Attapur Village, Rajendernagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It is stated, since April, 2022, both petitioner No.1 and her husband started living separately and from then, principal borrower defaulted in payment of home loan.

1.1. It is stated, petitioner No.l filed O.S.No. 643 of 2023 before the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Additional

Metropolitan Magistrate's Court at Rajendernagar against Vimal Suhah seeking a direction for monthly payment of EMI dues. [n the meanwhile, loan account was declared as a 'Non Performing Asset'. While so, accepting the OTS proposal of petitioner No.1 for an amount of Rs.25.5O lacs, tJ:e bank issued a settlement offer letter dated 21.06.2024 ar:d accordingly, petitioner No. 1 on 29.06.2024 transferred the entire sum to the bank and requested Respondent No.6 to return all the documents related to the subject propert5r. The ICICI Bank, Gandhidham Branch acknowledged payment and sent confirmation letter dated 29.04.2024 and they also sent letter dated O5.O7.2O25 to petitioner No.1 to collect documents from Respondent No.6 by 19.07.2024. However, Respondent No.6 refused to hand over all the documents citing pendency of suit. Petitioner No.l therefore, is stated to have addressed representation dated g1.O7.2O25 to Respondent No.6 and also raised a complaint regarding imposition of conditions with Reserve Bank of India on 26.08.2024 which was closed as being ah-judice.

1.2. It is stated, Petitioner No.l aggriev"d by the RBI reply dated 24.10.2024, addressed another representation dated 28.10.2024 to RBI Ombudsman stating that injunction suit has no bearing on the bank and imposing conditions is in violation a /

J of Section 171 of the Contracts Act, L976, however, petitioner No.1 has not received any response. Hence, the Writ Petition.

Learned counsel for petitioners Ms. Vala Srihitha submits that as the home loan account is settled by petitioner No.l, no prejudice would be caused to the bank due to pendency of suit and after satisfaction of Home loan, the bank cannot refuse to release the title documents. She relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sgndicate Bank a. Vtiag Kumart and that of Orissa High Court in Sujit Kumor

3. Respondents No.1 to 3 filed counter stating that petitioner No.l filed complaint dated 26.08.2024 through Complaint Management System (CMS) portal before the Reserve Bank of India against ICICI Bank; it was observed that complainant had selected the following option in CMS portal 'the complaint is sub-judice I und.er arbitration / already dealt with on merits by a Court / Tribunal / Arbitrator / Authority'; therefore, the complaint was auto closed by the system as non- maintainable under Clause 16(1)(a) 10(2xb[ii) and accordingly, closure letter dated 26.08.2024 was issued to complainant and ICICI Bank. It is also stated, thereafter, petitioner No.1 ' 1tssz1 2 scc 330 'zoz4 SCC Online Ori2632

submitted representation dated 27.08.2024, based on which complaint was registered in CMS portal against ICICI Bank and the same was forwarded to the bank. On 05.O9.2024, the bank replied that matter is under consideration in OS.No. 643 of 2023 and the same be withdrawn for releasing the propert5r and borrower needs to take steps for withdrawl. since the case is pending, complaint was closed on 16.O3 .2025. The Ombudsman followed the principles of natural justice and issued reasoned orders after examining every aspect of the matter.

4. Respondent No.6 filed counter stating that petitioner No.1 and her husband Sri vimal Suhag were granted home loan and instalments were recovered from the savings account of Mr. Vimal Suhag but he was not arrayed as part5r respondent to this writ Petition. Though petitioner No. 1 made OTS payment on 29.06.2024, she did not comply with the agreed mandatory conditions of withdrawl of pending litigation against the bank. The said conditions were condition precedent and were not introduced by bank after accepting the OTS amount. It is stated, due to pendency of the said proceedings, the bank acted with legal prudence and placed the matter on hold to ensure that their rights were not prejudiced by parallel litigation affecting the same loan account. It is therefore, lawful / arff prudent for the bank to await either formal withdrawl of a -

suit or to get an appropriate clarification or final order from the civil Court.

5. Heard Sri G. Kalyan Chakravarthy, learned Standing Counsel for Respondents 1 to 4.

6. Since Respondent No.6 had taken a ground that husband of petitioner No.1 i.e. principal borrower was not made part5i, on 10.12.2025, this Court directed learned counsel for petitioner to implead him as party respondent to this Writ Petition. Accordingly, learned counsel had taken out I.A.No. 3 of 2025. The said Application was ordered and notice was directed to be served on the impleaded respondent. Accordingly, though notice was served on15.12.2o25, Respondent No.7 did not appear before this Court.

7. Admittedly, petitioner No.1 settled and paid the entire home loan amount and ICICI Bank, Gandhidham Branch sent conlirmation letter dated 29.04.2024 stating that home loan account would be closed in five days and all the related documents such as no due certificate, title documents would be released and transferred to Respondent No.6 branch and directed petitioner No.1 uide letter dated O5.O7 -2025 to collect the property documents from them by I9-O7-2O24- The grievance of petitioner No.1 is that though there is such a direction, Respondent No.6 is not releasing the documents t citing pendency of civil suit filed against her husband and bank. At the same time, it is the case of respondent No.6 bank that though amount was cleared under OTS, petitioner No.1 has not complied with the mandatory condition of withdrawing pending litigation filed against them and this condition is to ensure that bank's rights were not prejudiced by parallel litigation affecting the same loan account.

8. Be that as it may, since the entire loan amount was cleared under OTS and to that effect, ICICI Bank also issued confirmation letter dated 29.04.2024, no prejudice would be caused to defend5nt No.Z bank in the suit, if documents are released in favour of petitioner No.1 pending litigation. Further, it is also to be seen, as per the directions of this Court, petitioner No.1 got impleaded her husband as Respondent No.7 and though notice was served, he did not make his appearance before this Court. In these circumstances, relying on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Syndi cate Bank o. Gijag Kumar (supra), which held that banker's lien under Section 17 L of the Contract Act, 1972 can only be exercised when there is an existing relationship between the banker and the customer; when the loan amount is settled, the relationship between the banker and customer ceases and the bankers lien comes to an end, this Court deems it appropriate to direct . r i l I

respondent bank to release the documents of the mortgaged propert5r in favour of petitioner No. 1.

9. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing Respondent ICICI Bank to release the documents in respect of the mortgaged property i.e. Flat No. 506, Silicon Ridge, Attapur Village, Rajender Nagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in favour of petitioner No.1 forthwith. No costs.

10. Consequently, the miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand closed. / SD/-P. PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I //TRUE COPY//

To SECTION OFFICER

1. The Reserve Bank of lndia, Fourth Floor, Amar Building, SirPM Road, Mumbai- 400001.

2. The Banking Ombudsman, Reserve Bank of lndia, Banking Ombudsman Office, 6-1 -56, Secretariat Road, Sai labad,Hyderabad-500004.

3. The Dealing Officer, Reserve Bank of lndia, Banking Ombudsman Office-ll, Fort Glacis, Chennai, Tamil Nadu- 600001.

4. The Banking Ombudsman, lclCl Bank Limited,34l,Arihant Apartment, Railway Colony, Ward 1 2A, Gand h idham, G ujarat-37 O2O1 .

5. The Bank fVlanager, lclcl Bank Limited Headoffice, lclcl Bank towers, Bandra-Kurla Complex Mumbai - 400 051.

6. The Bank Manager, lclcl Bank Limited, Rajendranagar, 4-3-143lA, BPR Towers, Attapur, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500048.

7. One CC to M/s VALA SRIHITHA, Advocate [OPUC]

8. One CC to SRI G.KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY, Advocate IOPUC]

9. Two CD Copies W . SA

HIGH COURT DATED:07/0112020

ORDER

WP.No.29898 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. tt (J ( Ii1tr O 1 6 J;l:i 7l'!1s * 1..., l \