Disposed

Joshy John v. State Bank of India

Kerala HC8 Oct 2021WP(C)/9102/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition filed by a petitioner who paid an auction amount for a bank-auctioned vehicle but failed to receive the vehicle due to regulatory issues. The petitioner withdrew the claim for the vehicle and sought a refund of the amount with interest. The court directed the bank to consider the refund requests. Additionally, relevant taxes due on the vehicle were noted.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents 1 and 2 to consider and pass appropriate orders on petitioner's requests (P3 and P4) for refund of auction amount with interest within one month.

Joshy John Vs State Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 8^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 16TH ASWINA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 9102 OF 2021

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

JOSHY JOHN AGED 51 YEARS S/O. JOHN, VADAKKEKARA HOUSE, PERUMBALLOOR P.O., ARAKKUZHA, MARADI, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686673. BY ADVS. G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. SMT.K.S.SMITHA

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 STATE BANK OF INDIA WADAKKANCHERY BRANCH, WADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT680582, REP. BY BRANCH MANAGER. 2 THE REGIONAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, SUBHAM TOWERS, 4TH FLOOR, EAST PORT, THRISSUR-680005. 3 STATE BANK OF INDIA, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH, 40/974, II FLOOR, R.S.BUILDINGS, OPP. MAHARAJA'S COLLEGE GROUND, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682011, REP. BY BRANCH MANAGER. 4 JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, WADAKKANCHERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680582. 5 REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680002. BY ADVS. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN (SR.) BY SMT.SHEEJA C.S., SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN SMT.PREETHI. P.V. SRI.M.V.BALAGOPAL

¶9

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶10

SATHISH NINAN, J.

¶11

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W. P. (C) No.9102 of 2021 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 8^th day of October, 2021

¶12

J U D G M E N T

¶13

The vehicle (bus) bearing Registration number KL-

¶14

48F-5335 was auctioned by the first respondent Bank on

¶15

15.06.2016 for an amount of `8 lakhs. The petitioner paid the auction amount in May 2018 which was duly accepted by the Bank. The vehicle was to be delivered to

¶16

the petitioner on the Bank obtaining fresh registration certificate in terms of Section 51 of the Motor Vehicle Act.

¶17

Admittedly, till date the vehicle has not been delivered to the petitioner. Exts.P1, P3 and P4 are letters issued by the petitioner to the Bank seeking delivery of the vehicle or in the alternative for refund of the amount paid by him. Consequent on the inaction on the part of the Bank, the petitioner has approached this Court with the following reliefs:-

¶18

W. P. (C) No.9102 of 2021

¶19

-: 2 :-

¶20

“i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the respondents 1 and 2 to release the vehicle No.L48F-5335 after obtaining fresh RC from the 4^th respondent without any further delay along with suitable compensation for the delay in effecting delivery of the vehicle even after a lapse of more than 34 months.

¶21

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the respondents 1 and 2 to consider and take a decision on Exts.P3 and P4 requests made by the petitioner for the refund of sum of Rs.8/- lakhs with interest or compensation to him from May, 2018 onwards in view of the failure to obtain fresh RC for the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-48-F-5335.”

¶22

Heard Sri.G.Hariharan the learned counsel for

¶23

the petitioner and Sri. T.Sethumadhavan the learned

¶24

senior counsel on behalf of the Bank and the learned senior Government pleader.

¶25

At the time of arguments, learned counsel for

¶26

the petitioner submits that, at this distance of time the petitioner is not any further interested in pursuing relief No.1 and that the same is given up. The

¶27

W. P. (C) No.9102 of 2021

¶28

-: 3 :-

¶29

petitioner seeks for an order in terms of Relief No.2

¶30

Respondent No.5, the Regional Transport Officer

¶31

has filed a statement through the learned Senior Government Pleader wherein it has been stated that, consequent to non-submission of G-Form since 31.03.2017 tax is due for the vehicle for the period from 01.04.2017 onwards. Evidently effective steps were not taken by the Bank in the said regard. Even though a one time tax facility was sought for and accepted, even as of now, the issue remains unresolved. Fresh RC has not been obtained so far. No effective steps have been taken by the Bank to get issuance of the same. At this distance of time, i.e. after a period of five years from the date of auction, the petitioner gives up his claim for the vehicle and seeks for return of the amount of `8 lakhs paid with interest thereof. The petitioner cannot be faulted for adopting such a course. Seeking return of the amount as above with interest, the petitioner has submitted Exts.P3 and P4 request before respondents 1

¶32

W. P. (C) No.9102 of 2021

¶33

-: 4 :-

¶34

and 2.

¶35

On the facts as noticed above, there is no reason why respondents 1 and 2 shall not consider Exts.P3 and P4 and that too without any further delay.

¶36

Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exts.P3 and P4 as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy//

P.S. to Judge

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9102/2021

¶43

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶44

EXHIBIT	P1 TRUE COPY SUBMITTED RESPONDENT	OF TH BY THE .	E REQUEST DATED 15.7.2019 PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST
EXHIBIT	P2 TRUE COPY STATUS OF	OF TH VEHICLE	E REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE NO.KL-48F-5335.
EXHIBIT	P3 TRUE COPY BY THE PE ALONG WITH	OF THE R TITIONER POSTAL	EQUEST DATED 21.1.2021 MADE BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT.
EXHIBIT	P4 TRUE COPY	OF THE R	EQUEST DATED 21.1.2021 MADE
	BY THE PE ALONG WITH	TITIONER POSTAL	BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ACKNOWLEDGMENT.

Joshy John v. State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joshy John v. State Bank of India

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

Muthoot Vehicles and Asset Finance Ltd., Vs the Regional Transport Officer/Registering Authority

Moosa C.C. Vs Station House Officer

M.v.Anitha Vs P.v.Krishnamarar

Jose M.B Vs the Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

Biju Vs State of Kerala

Parameswaran Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer