Ram Lal And Sons Huf v. Canara Bank & ANR.

$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2384/2024 & CM APPL. 1060/2026, CM APPL. 1125/2026 RAM LAL AND SONS HUF .....Petitioner Through:

Mr.

Kamlesh Anand, Mr.

Shashi Shekhar, Advs.

versus CANARA BANK & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr.

Rahul Malhotra, Mr.

Chirag Goyal, Advs.

Mr. Santosh Kumar Rout, Adv. for Canara Bank Ms. Vasudha, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

% 08.01.2026 1.

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India seeking directions against the respondent bank to de-freeze the debit transactions of the account bearing No. 1445101003969 of the petitioner.

2.

Mr. Anand, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the petitioner is a HUF and Mr. Pavan Kumar Gupta, is the Karta of the said HUF. The respondent bank has put the account on debit freeze based on a letter issued by one of the coparceners and this action of the respondent bank is contrary to law.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/01/2026 at 13:37:12

3.

Mr. Malhotra and Ms. Vasudha, learned counsels representing the other coparceners of the petitioner HUF, states that there is already a Memorandum of Partition dated 01.04.1976, wherein Pavan Kumar Gupta has already taken his legitimate dues from the HUF and consequently is not a part of the HUF. It is further urged by the learned counsels that the petitioner therefore, cannot operate the bank account. 4.

The same is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5.

I am of the view that the aforesaid issues are disputed question of fact and require detailed evidence for adjudication. The court in a writ jurisdiction cannot adjudicate these disputed questions of fact. Additionally, civil suits in this regard are already pending before the concerned Civil Courts.

6.

For the said reasons, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner, if any available in law, to move applications seeking release of the statutory dues and also to Ankush Gupta, another coparcener, for meeting the medical expenses of the minor child. 7.

The application, as and when moved before the concerned court, shall be considered expeditiously.

8.

The Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 9.

The present petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms. JASMEET SINGH, J JANUARY 8, 2026/sp The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/01/2026 at 13:37:12