Judgement MONGIA, C. J. :- The writ petitioner (now respondent) had purchased a Cash Certificate from the appellant Bank. After the Cash Certificate had matured for payment, the writ petitioner presented the same for realisation of the amount on maturity. The amount on maturity was Rs. 1,10,200.00. It may be observed here that on the body of the Cash certificate, the following is the endorsement :- "The Bank subject to rules in this regards undertakes to pay on maturity upon presentation and surrender of this certificate at the above Brach to the under noted persons." 2. The Appellants, who were the respondents before the writ Court, had put in their appearance through their counsel yet no counter was filed to the writ petition. Since the payment on maturity had not been released by the Bank, the writ petition was filed to realise the amount of the Cash Certificate. The learned single Judge allowed the writ petition by observing that there was no earthly reason for not releasing the amount of the Cash Certificate, which was presented on maturity. The learned single Judge was further of the view that interest is payable on the matured value of the Cash Certificate @ 12% per annum from 14-5-1990, the date on which the Cash Certificate was submitted for releasing the amount. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the Appellants. Since no written statement was filed to the writ petition, really speaking the Appellants cannot be allowed to raise any plea as to why the amount of the Cash Certificate should not be paid to the writ petitioner. Of course on the facts as may emerge from the pleadings in a writ petition law point can be urged even without the written statement. However, if the law point is based on some facts, naturally even the law point cannot be allowed to be raised, inasmuch as, the facts are absent minus the pleadings on behalf of the particular respondent in a writ petition. 4.Learned counsel for the appellants has urged that in the grounds of appeal, it has been mentioned that a Civil Suit for recovery of about Rs. 3 (three) crores had been filed by the Bank against the writ petitioner before the Civil Court and it was on that account that the payment on maturity of the Cash Certificate had been withheld by the Bank. 3 (three) crores had been filed by the Bank against the writ petitioner before the Civil Court and it was on that account that the payment on maturity of the Cash Certificate had been withheld by the Bank. Firstly, it is a question of fact as to whether any civil suit was pending at the behest of the appellants or not. Be that as it may, mere filing of a suit against a person cannot allow the Bank to withhold the payment on the maturity of a Cash Certificate as that will be in violation of the contractual obligation between the parties, which is apparent from the endorsement on the body of the certificate, which has already been reproduced above. In absence of any order from the Civil Court for not making any payment regarding the Cash Certificate or to withhold payment against any other instrument like Fixed Deposit receipt etc., a Bank is not legally entitled to withhold the encashment. In passing, we may observe here that it is not the case of the appellants that the Cash Certificate was a security against the loan regarding which the suit is said to be pending. For the foregoing reasons, we find no merit in this appeal, which is hereby dismissed. Appeal dismissed.