https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277299 The Supreme Court held that a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable even in contractual matters if the State acts unfairly, unjustly, or unreasonably, violating Article 14. The Court affirmed the right of the respondent-Company to the return of its title deeds after settling dues, emphasizing that the Bank's right to retain the mortgage deed ceased once the outstanding amount was cleared. The Court upheld the High Court's decision to issue a writ of mandamus for the return of the title deeds, highlighting the Bank's arbitrary and unfair actions. The appeal of the appellant-Bank was dismissed, directing the return of the title deeds within two weeks. en-us Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Aug 2023 18:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277299 The Supreme Court held that a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable even in contractual matters if the State acts unfairly, unjustly, or unreasonably, violating Article 14. The Court affirmed the right of the respondent-Company to the return of its title deeds after settling dues, emphasizing that the Bank's right to retain the mortgage deed ceased once the outstanding amount was cleared. The Court upheld the High Court's decision to issue a writ of mandamus for the return of the title deeds, highlighting the Bank's arbitrary and unfair actions. The appeal of the appellant-Bank was dismissed, directing the return of the title deeds within two weeks. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277299