Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Resolve Disputed Facts Regarding Document Custody but Bank Must Facilitate Duplicate Returns

The petitioner applied for a dairy unit loan of Rs. 15,00,000/- under the Samagra Gavya Vikas Yojna through the State Bank of India (Respondent No. 4). Despite the bank collecting processing, legal, and valuation charges and verifying title documents, the loan was not sanctioned, allegedly due to the discontinuation of the government scheme

The petitioner filed this writ petition alleging that the bank failed to return his original land documents and the full amount of charges deposited

The Bank contended that since the loan was never sanctioned, no mortgage was created, and thus original documents were never officially retained; they further claimed documents were returned by the bank's advocate after verification

1. Whether the High Court, in the exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 226, can adjudicate upon a disputed question of fact regarding the physical custody/loss of original title documents

2. Whether the respondent Bank is liable to provide duplicate documents and compensation for the alleged loss of the petitioner's title deeds

Article 226 of the Constitution of India, specifically the doctrine that "disputed questions of fact" cannot be decided in summary writ proceedings

Fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19, and 21 as invoked by the petitioner regarding arbitrary state action

Internal banking procedures regarding the creation of equitable mortgages and the handling of collateral documents

The Court observed a sharp contradiction between the parties: the petitioner insisted the documents were with the bank, while the bank provided two conflicting versions—first, that they never received the originals, and second, that the advocate returned them after verification

The Court determined that such factual disputes, requiring evidence to resolve which party is truthful, are not suited for writ proceedings

The Court reasoned that if the documents were indeed lost while in the Bank's constructive or actual custody during the loan process, the Bank holds a responsibility to assist in restoring the petitioner's title records through official channels

Regarding the documents, the Court held that if the documents are found to have been lost while in the Bank's custody, the Bank is directed to take all necessary legal steps to provide duplicate/certified copies of the title documents to the petitioner

This process must be completed within three months from the receipt of the order