Patna High Court
Chandra Bhushan PathakversusThe Regional Manager, Central Bank of India
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed, upholding the Single Judge’s order directing the bank to pay the maturity amount with 8% per annum interest from 28‑10‑2019.
Summary
Chandra Bhushan Pathak, a farmer, filed a writ petition seeking payment of Rs.99,847 deposited in a Dhan Vridhi Scheme, alleging the bank had unlawfully retained the amount and earned interest. The bank countered that the amount was held in a secure account under a banker’s cheque, which must be revalidated after three months, and that it could not profit from the funds. The Single Judge directed the bank to pay the maturity amount of Rs.99,487 with interest at 8% per annum from 28‑10‑2019, rejecting the petitioner’s claim for interest from 1999. On appeal, the Division Bench examined whether there was any perversity or error in the lower court’s order. Finding none and noting the limited scope of interference in a Letters Patent Appeal, the bench dismissed the appeal, leaving the lower court’s directions intact.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondents are legally bound to pay the amount of Rs.99,847 with interest to the petitioner.
- Whether there is a deficiency in service on the part of the bank for not paying the amount.
- Whether the bank's action is arbitrary, illegal, and mala fide.
- Whether the petitioner’s constitutional rights are infringed by the bank’s conduct.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to interest from March 1987 or from a later date.
Subjects
- Banker's cheque
- Secure account
- Bank liability
- Interest calculation
- Letters Patent Appeal
- Civil Writ Jurisdiction
- Banking Companies (Period of Preservation of Records) Rules, 1985
- Arbitrary action
- Constitutional rights
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.188 of 2025
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4259 of 2024
======================================================
Chandra Bhushan Pathak, son of Late Sheo Kumar Pathak, Resident of
Village-Saisar, P.S.-Dinara, District-Rohtas.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India Maurya Lok, Patna.
2. The Manager, Central Bank of India, Buxar, Dist. Buxar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Braj Bhushan Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Suresh Mishra, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 29-01-2026
This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the
appellant Chandra Bhushan Pathak challenging the order dated
24.01.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No.
4259 of 2024.
The writ petition was filed by the appellant seeking
for the following relief(s):-
Patna High Court L.P.A No.188 of 2025 dt.29-01-2026
2/6
“For issuance of an appropriate writ, order
or direction to the respondents for making
payment of Rs.99847/- (Ninety nine
thousand eight hundred and forty seven
rupees) along with interest since March
1987 deposited by the petitioner in Dhan
Vridhi Scheme by issuing an appropriate
writ, order or direction to the respondent.”
The relevant grounds taken in the writ petition are as
follows:-
“(I) Whether the respondents are legally bound
to pay the amount to the tune of
Rs.99,847/- to the petitioner along with
interest since March 1987 deposited by him
in Dhan Vridhi Scheme?
(II) Whether there is deficiency in service on
the part of the respondent in not paying the
aforesaid amount to the petitioner in spite
of all his best efforts?
(III) Whether the action of the respondent is
arbitrary, illegal and mala fide in the eye
of law.
(IV) Whether the constitutional right of the
petitioner enshrined in the Constitution of
India can be taken away by the arbitrary
and illegal action of the respondents?
(V) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get
payment of Rs.99847/- alongwith interest
since March 1987?”
2. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent-
Bank wherein it is stated as follows:-
“9. That it is pertinent to mention here that
Patna High Court L.P.A No.188 of 2025 dt.29-01-2026
3/6
once a Financial Institution or the Bank
issued a Banker's Cheque for an amount
by which the Financial Institution or the
Bank is bound to keep that amount of
issued Banker’s Cheque in a secure
account. Once the corresponding amount
is been sent to keep in the Secure Account,
the Financial Institution or the Bank could
not earn any kind of benefit/profit in any
manner on the corresponding amount of
the Cheque since it has to be called as
reserved account since it has limited
territorial access. From the Annexure-1, it
is apparent that the validity of the
Banker’s Cheque is mentioned as only for
three months. The petitioner is required to
get the Cheque revalidate by placing the
original Stale-dated Banker’s Cheque
before the concerned Branch/Authority
and then place for clearance of the same
only. The Bank would be liable to pay the
amount which has been mentioned in the
Stale-dated Cheque. Since it requires its
revalidation and other process to credit the
payment, thereafter, the payment of the
mentioned amount of the said cheque will
be made.
11. That it is relevant to state that as per Rule-2
of the Banking Companies (Period of
Preservation of Records) Rules, 1985, the
Banking Company shall preserve, in good
order, its books, accounts and other
documents mentioned below, relating to a
period of not less than five years
immediately, preceding the current
calendar year.
Ledger and Registers;
(1) Cheque Books Registers
(2) Delivery Order Registers
Patna High Court L.P.A No.188 of 2025 dt.29-01-2026
4/6
(3) Demand Liability Registers
(4)Demand Remittance Dispatched Registers
(5) Demand Remittance Received Registers
(6) Vault Registers
Records other than Registers;
(1) Telegraphic Transfer Confirmation
(2) Telegrams and Telegram Confirmations.
And in view of provision, the connected
record of so called petitioner's Banker's
cheque is not available in the Branch of the
respondent Bank.”
3. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the
respective parties and going through the pleadings and the
counter affidavit, has been pleased to observe as follows:-
“4. Considering the above mentioned facts and
circumstances this Court is of the opinion
that the ends of justice would be met if the
authority the respondent Bank is directed
to pay the maturity amount of Rs. 99,487/-
together with the interest calculated at the
rate of 8% P.A from 28.10.2019 till the
date of actual payment. The petitioner is
directed to make a suitable representation
enclosing the banker cheque before the
respondent Bank within a period of four
weeks from today and after receiving the
same the respondent authority shall
calculate the total amount due to the
petitioner as per the directions of this
Court and pay the same within a period of
four weeks from the date of receipt of the
representation.”
4. The sole contention raised by the learned counsel
Patna High Court L.P.A No.188 of 2025 dt.29-01-2026
5/6
for the appellant is that since the appellant, who is a poor
farmer, has not withdrawn the amount in question and it was
lying with the Bank and the Bank might have utilized it for
some other purpose and earned interest, the appellant is entitled
to get such interest with effect from 06.08.1999.
5. However, on perusal of the counter affidavit, it is
very clear that such amount has to be kept in Secure Account
therefore, the question of utilizing such money for any other
purpose by the Bank does not arise and the learned Single Judge
was quite justified in refusing the prayer of the appellant,
however, granted relief to the appellant by directing to pay the
maturity amount of Rs. 99,487/- together with the interest
calculated at the rate of 8% per annum.
6. In view of the limited scope in interference with the
Single Judge’s order by the Division Bench in a Letters Patent
Appeal, since we find that there is no perversity in the impugned
order and it is a jurisdiction which is really a corrective
jurisdiction and rarely used to correct errors and there is no
palpable error on the face of the impugned order, we are not
inclined to interfere with the same.
7. Accordingly, the Letters Patent Appeal stands
dismissed.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.188 of 2025 dt.29-01-2026
6/6
8. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of.
(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)
P.K.P./-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 30.01.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…