Holding

The bank must release the securities to the appellant upon receipt of full and final settlement of the loan, and both parties must withdraw their respective pending proceedings.

Summary

The appellant, L.P. Shashi Kumar, on behalf of Goldstone Technologies Ltd., sought release of securities pledged to Industrial Development Bank of India (IDBI) after paying a full and final settlement of a Rs.1000‑lakh term loan. IDBI had obtained a stay from the High Court against an order of the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission directing release of those securities. The Supreme Court, hearing a special leave petition, allowed the guarantor to deposit the settlement amount with the bank and directed the bank to consider releasing the securities. After the appellant deposited Rs.54,22,237, the Court held that this constituted full and final settlement and ordered the bank to release the pledged shares and other securities. Accordingly, the Court directed the bank to withdraw its writ petition before the High Court and the appellant to withdraw the pending case before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The appeal was disposed of without costs.

Issues considered

Whether the bank is obligated to release pledged securities upon receipt of full and final settlement of the loan.
Whether the bank may continue its writ petition after the settlement payment has been made.
Whether the appellant must withdraw the pending consumer commission case after the settlement.

Subjects

release of securitiesfull and final settlementbankingwrit petitionconsumer disputes redressal commissionguarantorshare pledgeterm loan

Judgment

"'i
L.P. SHASHI KUMAR A
v.
INDUSTRIAL DEV. BANK OF INDIA LTD.

FEBRUARY 8, 2007

[DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN AND AL TAMAS KABIR, JJ.] B

Banks/Banking:
'i
Release of securities-Held, in view of payment made by appellant
towards full and final settlement of dues of respondent-Bank, said bank
c
.. would release the securities-Parties would withdraw their respective cases
pending before the High Court and the State Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission.

Respondent no. I-bank approached the High Court against the order of D
the A.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission directing release
-~ of security to the appellant. The High Court stayed operation of the order of
~ the Commission. In the special leave petition filed by the appellant, the
Supreme Court while issuing notice granted liberty to the principal debtor
or the guarantor to deposit the money with the bank so that the Court could E
consider the prayer for return of share certificates and title documents.
Pursuant to the said order the guarantor deposited the money with respondent
no.1.

Disposing of the appeal, the Court
F
1
HELD: In view of the payment made by the appellant towards full and
final settlement of the dues of IDBI, the said bank is directed to release the
securities to respondent no.3 forthwith. Nothing further survives for the bank
to pursue the writ petition filed by it before the High Court. Therefore, the
bank is directed to withdraw the said writ petition. Likewise, the appellant is G
also directed to withdraw the case filed by him before the A.P. State Consumer
.... -1. Disputes Redressal Commission immediately. [Para 6] [383-A-B]

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 644 of2007.

379 H
380 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007] 2 S.C.R.

A From the Final Judgment/Order dated 27.4.2006 of the High Court of
Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in W.P. -:-.lo. 795112006 and W.P.M.P. No. 10172/
2006 in W.P. No. 795112006.

G. Bikshapathy, T. Anamika and A. Chandra Mohan for the Appellant.

B Sanjay Bhatt and Amit Kumar for the Respondents.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, J. I. Leave granted. )'

c 2. Heard Mr .G. Bikshapathy, learned seni"r counsel appearing on behalf
of the appellant and Mr.Sanjay Bhatt, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the contesting respondent No. I (Industrial Dev. Bank of India Ltd.).

3. This appeal was filed against the o~der passed by the Higl1 Court of
Andhra Pradesh dt.27.04.2006 in W.P.No.7951 of2006 and W.P.l\f P.No.10172
D of 2006. The High Court was approached by the first respondent herein
against the direction given by the A.P.State Consumer Disputes Redressal
~
Commission directing release of security to the appellant herein. The High
Court stayed the operation of the order dt.06.04.2006 passed by the A.P.State ;.

Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad in CDIA No.33/2006
E (CD No. l/2006). When the matter came up for admission before this Court on
19 .06.2006, this Court passed the following Order :-

"Issue notice returnable within six weeks.

"In the meanwhile, the operation of the impugned order passed
F by the High Court in WPMP No. 1017212006 in WP No.7951/2006
dt.27 .04.2006 shall remain stayed.

"In the meantime, either the principal debtor or the guarantor are
at liberty to deposit the money with the bank so that this Court may
G consider the prayer for return of share certificates and title documents
to the petitioner-guarantor. This direction is issued since the GTL is
ready to pay the outstanding principal amount of Rs.4.80 crores along
with 9% interest per annum from December, 2003."
1-- .
4. By Order dt.31.10.2006, the main Special Leave Petition itself was
H directed to be listed for final hearing. Today, when the matter is taken up for
LP. SHA SHI KUMAR v. INDUSTRIAL DEV. BANK OF INDIA LTD. [LAKSHMANAN,l) 38J

hearing, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant placed ·A
''i before us a communication dt.O 1.02.2007 addressed to the Deputy General
Manager, Industrial Development Bank oflndia Limited, Huderabad. The said
communication reads thus :-

"Date: 01-02-2007
B
To
The Deputy General Manager,
Industrial Development Bank of India Limited,
Main Branch,
Hyderabad - 500 00 I c
Dear Sir,

Sub:- Full and Final settlement of Term Loan of Rs. I 000 lacs.

Ref:-1) Our Term Loan account GOLTOIOl 100, GOLTOIOl 101 and D
GOLTOIOl 102

1 (2) Your letter bearing no.IDBI(H)No.5278/CFD(GTL)
-4 With reference to the above cited-subject, please find enclosed Cheque
bearing no.672421 for Rs.54,22,237.00, drawn on Mis UCO Bank, Abid E
Circle Branch, towards full and final settlement of Term Loan referred
in (I) above.

We request yourselves to acknowledge the receipt of the above said
payment, issue Jetter towards full and final settlement of the said Term
loan and release all charges created on the assets of our company, F
·-f personal guarantees executed by the management of our company in
favour of IDBI, release pledge of 15,00,000 equity shares of Goldstone
Technologies Ltd., held by Goldstone Exports Ltd. and any other
securities/sureties executed in this regard.

Thanking you G
Yours truly,
For Goldstone Technologies Ltd.
:. ·i. Sd/-
D.P. Sreenivas
Executive Director" H
382 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2007] 2 S.C.R.

A 5. The learned senior counsel for the appellant has also placed before ~
y
us a communication by way of reply to the communication dt.01.02.2007 sent
to the Managing Director, Goldstone Technologies Ltd .. The said letter reads
thus :-

"IDBI(H) No. /CFD(GTL) February 3, 2007
B
The Managing Director,
Goldstone Technologies Ltd.,
Amarchand Shanna Complex,
S.D.Road, :.--

c Secunderabad - 500 003.
Dear Sir,

Rupee term loan of Rs.1000 lakh-Settlement of dues

Please refer to your letter dated February 1, 2007 forwarding a \::'
D cheque for Rs.54,22,23 7/- (Rupees fifty four lakh twenty two thousand
two hundred thirty seven only) towards full and final settlement of
dues of IDBI. In this connection, we advise that on receipt of the ..I
aforesaid payment, there are no dues from the company to IDBI and ,__
the term loan account of Rs. I000 lakh stands fully repaid. We, therefore,
E advise you to arrange to withdraw the cases pending before the
A.P.State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad and
Hon'ble Supreme Court oflndia to enable us to release the securities
etc. at the earliest.
Yours faithfully,
F Sci/-
y
(V.V.Rao)
Dy.General Manager" .
;-
6. It is thus seen that in compliance of the Order of this Court dt.19.06.2006,
G the guarantor deposited the money with the first respondent. Since the sum =-
of Rs.54,22,237/- (Rupees fifty four lakh twenty two thousand two hundred I--

thirty seven only) has been paid by the appellant to the first respondent bank
towards full and final settlement of the dues of IDBI, the IDBI has requested
r

H
the appellant herein to withdraw the cases pending before the A.P.State
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad and in this Court to -
L.P. SHA SHI KUMARi' INDUSTRIAL DEY. BANK OF INDIA LTD. [I..~KSHM/\NAN . .J.] 383

"' enable them to release the securities at the earliest. In view of the payment A
of Rs.54,22.237/- made by the appellant towards full and final settlement of
the dues of IDBI, the said bank is ·directed to release the securities to
respondent No.3 (Goldstone Technologies Ltd.) forthwith. In view of the final
payment now received by IDBI, there is nothing further survives for the bank
to pursue the Writ Petition No.7951/2006 tiled by them before the High Court. B
Therefore. the IDBI is directed to withdraw the said Writ Petition from the
High Court. Likewise, the appellant is also directed to withdraw the case tiled
by him before the A.P.State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission,
Hyderabad immediately. The zerox copies of the letter dt.01.02.2007 and
03.02.2007 are placed on record and will form part of this Order.
c
7. We make it clear that the deposit of sum of Rs.54,22,237/- now made
by the appellant is in addition to the sum of Rs.89,96,636/- deposited by the
guarantor pursuant to our interim order dt.19.06.2006 in full and final settlement
of the bank dues.

8. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. D
R.P. Appeal disposed of.