Disposed

Krishna Chauhan v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC12 Jun 2023WP(C)/3191/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner claimed unpaid part hire charges for a requisitioned vehicle. Supreme Court dismissed the government's plea for more time due to failure to file an affidavit-in-opposition, deemed joint admission of debt, and directed release of the admitted amount within three months.

What did the court decide?

Admitted claim of Rs.18,47,810/- directed to be released within 3 months upon verification.

Krishna Chauhan Vs the State of Assam and 5… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010091822022

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/3191/2022

¶5

KRISHNA CHAUHAN

¶6

S/O- RAMAYAN CHAUHAN, R/O- KHARIKHANA, P.O. KHARIKHANA, P.S. LANKA, DIST. HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN- 782446.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS

¶9

THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.

¶10

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006.

¶11

3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-7.

¶12

4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE HOJAI SANKARDEV NAGAR DIST. HOJAI ASSAM

¶13

5:MOTOR TRANSPORT OFFICER (MTO)

¶14

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-7.

¶15

Page No.# 2/4

¶16

6:MOTOR TRANSPORT OFFICER (MTO) POLICE RESERVE SANKARDEV NAGAR DIST. HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 782442

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K HUSSAIN

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶19

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Date : 12.06.2023

¶22

Heard Mr. A.K. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. S. Sarma, learned Govt. advocate appearing for respondent nos. 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, Ms. S. Chutia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. P. Nayak, learned standing counsel for respondent no.2.

¶23

At the outset, the learned Govt. advocate has prayed for some more time to obtain instruction, which is still awaited despite several letters including last letter issued on 19.05.2023.

¶24

In brief, the case of the petitioner is that he owns vehicle bearing registration no. AS02T4251, which was requisitioned by the respondent no.4. It is claimed that the requisition was illegal because at the relevant time the vehicle was parked at the residence of the petitioner and the vehicle was retained by the respondent no.4 i.e Superintendent of Police, Hojai from 01.08.2017 to 10.04.2022. It is claimed that the petitioner was given a part payment. However, despite making the part payment, an outstanding amount of

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

Rs.18,47,810/- is still due, which has not been paid despite requests and reminders.

¶27

In this case, notice of motion was issued by order dated 25.05.2022, but till date, the respondents have not denied their liability and no affidavit-inopposition has been filed to dispute the claim made in this writ petition. Therefore, the Court is compelled to reject the prayer made by the learned Govt. advocate for some more time and by drawing the doctrine of nontraverse, it is deemed that the respondents have jointly and severally admitted the claim of the petitioner to the extent of Rs.18,47,810/- for part hire charges of the vehicle from 01.08.2017 to 10.04.2022.

¶28

Accordingly, the Court is inclined to provide that it would be open to the Superintendent of Police, Hojai (respondent no.2) to make an enquiry about genuineness of the claim of the petitioner and the admitted amount shall be released to the petitioner within an outer limit of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order by his office.

¶29

The petitioner shall produce a certified copy of this order along with fresh copy of the bills statement and proof of part payment made to the petitioner and shall provide his e-mail address and/ or mobile number containing messaging application such as WhatsApp, Telegaram, etc.

¶30

The petitioner is permitted to also serve a certified copy of this order on the Director General of Police (respondent no.3) to bring this order to the notice of the said authority.

¶31

With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶32

Page No.# 4/4

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

Comparing Assistant

Krishna Chauhan v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Chauhan v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Highbrow, Vs Kasturi Bharali and 2 Ors.

Assam Institute of Health Allied Science Vs Kasturi Bharali and 2 Ors.

Jamal Uddin Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Dulal Mir Vs Union of India and 4 Ors.

Shafikul Islam and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Abidur Rahman Mazumdar and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 17 Ors.