Patna High Court

Ram Sushil RoyversusThe Canara Bank

Decided: 20 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: A ABHISHEK REDDY

Holding

The petition is infructuous and is therefore disposed of.

Summary

Ram Sushil Roy filed a writ petition against Canara Bank alleging grievances over a loan account. The bank contended that the loan had been fully repaid under an evacuee scheme and that the mortgaged documents had been returned to the petitioner. The petitioner’s counsel said he had no instructions on the matter but was willing to accept the bank’s position. The court examined whether any relief remained to be granted. Finding that the loan was settled and no further relief could be granted, the court held the petition to be infructuous and disposed of it.

Issues considered

Whether the writ petition remains maintainable after the loan has been fully settled and the mortgaged documents returned.

Subjects

loan settlement
evacuee scheme
writ petition
infructuous
bank‑customer dispute

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16492 of 2025
                 ======================================================
                 Ram Sushil Roy, Son of Late Misri Roy @ Misri Ray, Resident of Village-
                 Daudpur, P.S. Khagaul, Danapur, District- Patna.

                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
           1.    The Canara Bank Head Office 6648, 112, JC Rd, P.B. Halsurpete,
                 Nagarathpete, Bangalore, Karnataka- 560001.
           2.    The D.G.M., Canara Bank Luv Kush Tower Exhibition Road, P.S. Gandhi
                 Maidan, Patna.
           3.    The A.G.M., Canara Bank, Luv Kush Tower, Exhibition Road, Patna.
           4.    The Authorized Officer, Canara Bank Nijamat Branch, P.S. Danapur,
                 District- Patna.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :    Mr. Subodh Prasad, Advocate.
                 For the Respondent/s   :    Mr. Rajan Ghoshrave, Advocate.
                 For the Bank           :    Mr. Prashant Kumar, Advocate.
                                             Mr. Nishant Kumar, Advocate.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. ABHISHEK REDDY
                                    ORAL ORDER

2   20-01-2026                   Learned counsel    appearing on behalf        of   the

                   Respondent-Bank, on instructions, submits that the loan account

                   of the petitioner has been settled by way of evacuee scheme and

                   the petitioner has already availed the same and repaid the entire

                   loan amount and the documents which were mortgaged with the

                   Respondent-Bank have already been returned to the petitioner.

                                 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner submits that he has no instructions on the same,

                   however, he agrees for the disposal of the claims.
           Patna High Court CWJC No.16492 of 2025(2) dt.20-01-2026
                                                      2/2




                                 3. Having regard to the same, the present writ petition

                     is disposed of as having become infructuous.



                                            (A. Abhishek Reddy , J)
shakir/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…