In this writ petition, the petitioner sought mandamus to accept loan installments and release a secured vehicle. The court held that the petition was not maintainable against the private respondent company, thus dismissing it and directing the petitioner to seek appropriate legal remedies.
none granted; petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 3
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23601 of 2021
Petitioner :- Asheesh Tripathi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Deena Nath Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pranjal Mehrotra
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.
This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief:
" (i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.4 to accept the due loan amount in easy installments from the petitioner.
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no.4 to release the vehicle of petitioner forthwith in accordance with law. "
Learned counsel for the respondent No.4, i.e. Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd., states that the writ petition is not maintainable for two reasons, firstly that the relief has been sought only against the respondent No.4, which is a private party and secondly that the amount being shown as arrears by the petitioner is disputed.
We find force in the submission of learned counsel for the respondent No.4. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed leaving it open for the petitioner to avail such remedy as may be available to him under law.
Order Date :- 24.11.2021 NLY
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking mandamus against the private respondent company was maintainable.
Whether the petition was capable of being passed in the name of respondent no. 4 alone.
Asheesh Tripathi
State Of U.P.
Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Ltd.
Surya Prakash Kesarwani
Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
