The Branch Manager vs. Bogidhola Tea And Trading Co. (P) LTD., And 2 Ors
Original PDF →Facts
This matter concerns an interlocutory application filed by the Branch Manager of Axis Bank Ltd., Guwahati Branch. The applicant bank sought directions for the writ petitioner, Bogidhola Tea and Trading Co. (P) Ltd., to submit updated address proof for its registered office or local administrative office. The petitioner had previously submitted a certificate from the Letukajan Gaon Panchayat verifying its registered office address, which was one of the 17 documents mandated for KYC verification by banks. The applicant bank did not dispute the validity or sufficiency of this submitted certificate. The interlocutory application was filed in connection with a larger writ petition, WP(C)/5043/2023.
Held
The Court held that the certificate submitted by the writ petitioner, issued by the Letukajan Gaon Panchayat, is a valid document for KYC verification as per the bank's mandated list of 17 documents. Since the applicant bank did not dispute the sufficiency of this certificate, the Court found that the writ petitioner had complied with the requirements. Consequently, no further adjudication was necessary for the interlocutory application, and it was closed. The Court did not explicitly address the alternative prayer concerning the Trade Licence for the local administrative office, as the primary submission was deemed sufficient.
Key Issues
1. Whether the certificate issued by the Letukajan Gaon Panchayat, verifying the registered office address of the writ petitioner, constitutes sufficient compliance with the bank's KYC requirements, as per the list of 17 acceptable documents. 2. Whether the writ petitioner has fulfilled the alternative requirement of submitting a Trade Licence for its local administrative office in Guwahati, if it chose to maintain that address. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that the certificate from the Letukajan Gaon Panchayat, submitted as per the Court's earlier directions, is indeed one of the 17 acceptable documents for KYC verification by a bank. Therefore, they have complied with the requirements. Revenue/State's Argument: The applicant bank (representing the revenue/state interest in this context) did not dispute the petitioner's submission regarding the Gaon Panchayat certificate being a valid KYC document. Their application sought further documents, but the core issue became whether the already submitted document was sufficient.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER Date : 13.08.2024
Heard Mr. P. Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant. Also heard Mr. Bedanta Kaushik, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party/writ petitioner.
The present interlocutory application has been instituted by the respondent No. 4, herein, i.e. Branch Manager, Axis Bank Ltd., Guwahati Branch, as an applicant, praying for the following directions:
Page No.# 4/5 “In the aforesaid premises, it is there- fore prayed that Your Lordships would graciously be pleased to pass order directing the writ petitioner to submit its {i}. if he is agreed to continue with its registered corporate office address, its {a} Certificate Of Incorporation" Or {b}. GST Registration certificate Or {c} Trade licence in the name of the Company against its registered office situated at Letekujan, Golaghat as latest/upto-date address proof of its registered office address, Or any available acceptable documents from the list of 17 numbers of documents as per Annexure-A and G. -OR- {ii} The writ petitioner, if he is agreed to keep its local Admin office address as "Parag Bhawan, Ulubari, G.S. Road, Ghy, then the writ petitioner may be directed to submit the "Trade Licence" issued by the Guwahati Municipal Corporation to the Company against its local Admin office at Guwahati, showing its local office address as "Parag Bhawan, 4th floor, Ulubari, G.S. Road, Ghy, Or any available acceptable documents from the list of 17 numbers of documents as per Annexure-A and G, within 48 hours and upon failure, vacate the interim order dated 13/09/2023 passed in W.P.(c) No.5043/2023.”
The documents sought for from the petitioner Company by the applicant Bank in terms of the above prayer, are in the alternative. Mr. Kaushik, learned counsel, has submitted that in terms of the directions passed by this Court vide order, dated 19.04.2024; the petitioner Company had submitted a certificate, dated 24.04.2024, from the Letukajan Gaon Panchayat verifying the address of the registered Office of the petitioner Company.
It is contended at the Bar that the said certificate as submitted by the petitioner Company vide communication, dated 25.04.2024, is one of the 17(seventeen) documents as mandated for the purpose of verifying the “KYC of a customer of a Bank”.
Page No.# 5/5 The said position is not disputed by the applicant Bank. In the above view of the matter, the said certificate not having been disputed by the applicant, herein; the documents as sought for in terms of the prayers as made in the instant interlocutory application is to be held to have been complied with by the opposite parties/writ petitioners and accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that no further adjudication is called for in this interlocutory application and consequently, the same stands closed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.