R.d.s. Transport v. Punjab National Bank

2025:CGHC:42301 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR NAFR WPC No. 4475 of 2025 1 - R.D.S. Transport Through Its Proprietor Ganesh Agrawal S/o Late Shree Jagdish Prashad Agrawal Aged About 52 Years R/o Savitri Niwas Anathaalay Road, Handi Chowk, Raigarh District Raigarh C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Punjab National Bank Through Its Branch Manager, Branch Office- Basant Talkies Area, Near The Income Tax Office, Ambikapur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - I C I C I Bank Through Its Branch Manager, Branch Manager Branch Office- Modi Complex And Regency, Jagatpur Road, Raigarh C.G. 3 - Jai Hanuman Coal Depot Having Its Registered Office At Near Nepa Lodge, Old Bus Stand, Agresen Ward, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh Through Its Proprietor Rahul Agrawal S/o Shri K.K. Agrawal R/o Near Nepal Lodge, Old Bus Stand, Agresen Ward Ambikapur, District Surguja C.G.----Respondents ----Respondents Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, JudgeOrder on Board 21/08/2025 1.With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2.By way of this petition, the petitioner is challenging the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities, particularly respondent No. 1 the part of the respondent authorities, particularly respondent No. 1 for failing to take appropriate steps to freeze or recall the amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- which was mistakenly transferred by the petitioner to the account of respondent No. 3- Jai Hanuman Coal Depot, Ambikapur, due to inadvertence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, a coal trader and proprietor of R.D.S. Transport, engaged in the business of coal trading and transportation for over 30 years, has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking urgent relief against the inaction of respondent banks and the wrongful retention of funds by respondent no.3. On 12.05.2025, while intending to transfer ₹25,00,000/- to his regular supplier Hanuman Coal Traders, Bilaspur, the petitioner inadvertently transferred a sum of ₹25,00,000/- from his ICICI Bank account at Raigarh to the account of Jai Hanuman Coal Depot, Ambikapur, held with Punjab National Bank, due to name similarity in the saved beneficiary list. Despite promptly alerting ICICI Bank and serving a legal notice to the unintended recipient, respondent no.3, the amount has not been refunded, and Punjab National Bank has washed its hands off the matter without taking any proactive steps to prevent unjust enrichment. The petitioner, facing acute financial hardship and disruption in his business operations due to the said loss, has been compelled to approach this Hon'ble Court seeking writs and directions to protect his right to property and ensure fair banking practices in cases of mistaken transactions. He prays that he has made an application to the respondents but till date no action has been taken. 4.Learned counsel for respondent submits that in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking direction to respondents to consider the pending application, he has having no objection to the limited prayer and the application of the petitioner will be considered in accordance with law.prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking direction to respondents to consider the pending application, he has having no objection to the limited prayer and the application of the petitioner will be considered in accordance with law. 5.I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.material available on record. 4.Learned counsel for respondent submits that in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking direction to respondents to consider the pending application, he has having no objection to the limited prayer and the application of the petitioner will be considered in accordance with law.prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking direction to respondents to consider the pending application, he has having no objection to the limited prayer and the application of the petitioner will be considered in accordance with law. 5.I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.material available on record. 6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case instead of keeping this petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage directing the concerned authorities to decide the application (Annexure P/4) and (Annexure P/5) after giving opportunity of hearing to concerned party in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. The petitioner is at liberty to file application before the concerned authorities .keeping this petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage directing the concerned authorities to decide the application (Annexure P/4) and (Annexure P/5) after giving opportunity of hearing to concerned party in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. The petitioner is at liberty to file application before the concerned authorities . 7.With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti