Dismissed

Remitha Manoj v. M/S.Tata Capital Finance Service Ltd.

Kerala HC7 Dec 2023WP(C)/9192/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a writ petition filed by a defaulter against a finance company and RTO. The court found the finance company validly disposed of the seized vehicle to a third party, directing the petitioner to execute necessary documents in favor of that purchaser.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to execute necessary documents in favor of Sri. Faisal A. Pending interlocutory application stands dismissed.

Remitha Manoj Vs M/S.Tata Capital Finance Service Ltd. — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 7^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA,

¶5

1945

¶6

WP(C) NO. 9192 OF 2023

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

REMITHA MANOJ AGED 42 YEARS D/O.DHARMAN, KUNNATHULLY HOUSE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT., PIN - 680003

¶9

BY ADV P.K.PRIYA

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 M/S.TATA CAPITAL FINANCE SERVICE LTD. "CENTENNIAL SQUARES", 1ST FLOOR, NO.6A, DR.AMBEDKAR SALAI, KODAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI-600024. REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR.K.KRISHNAPRASAD, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.A.P.PRASAD CHANDRAN, KAILAS HOUSE, CHANDRATHIL ROAD, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI, PIN - 682024

¶12

2 THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, THRISSUR, PIN – 680003.

¶13

BY ADVS. P.V.SARITHA VENUGOPAL N.P.RUKSANA(K/329/2015) ROHINI P.K.(K/000770/2020)

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

JOBY JOSEPH-GP

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C) NO. 9192 OF 2023 .

¶18

¶19

J U D G M E N T

¶20

The present writ petition has been filed mainly seeking the following reliefs:

¶21

“1. Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-08-BK-3369, till up to the disposal of this writ petition.

¶22

Issue a Writ of Certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading up to Exhibits P1, P2 and P3 and quash the same as illegal.”

¶23

The petitioner availed finance for

¶24

purchase of a Baleno car bearing registration No.KL-08/BK-3369 from the 1^st respondent-financier. It appears that the petitioner could not discharge the liability towards the 1^st respondent-financier. The vehicle was taken over by the 1^st respondent and thereafter, it was sold to another person, named Faisal A., the details of whom have been provided by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is further submitted that the 1^st respondent has no

¶25

¶26

WP(C) NO. 9192 OF 2023 .

¶27

objection in transferring the vehicle in favour of the said Sri.Faisal A. The petitioner may execute necessary documents in favour of the said Sri.Faisal A. for transferring the vehicle in his favour.

¶28

Considering the said stand of the 1^st respondent-financier, nothing survives in the present writ petition and the petitioner is directed to execute necessary documents in favour of Sri.Faisal A, in whose favour the car of the petitioner has been transferred by the 1^st respondent-Financier.

¶29

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the present writ petition stands finally disposed of. Pending interlocutory application, if any, in the writ petition stands dismissed.

¶30

Sd/DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE

¶31

¶32

WP(C) NO. 9192 OF 2023 .

¶33

¶34

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9192/2023

¶35

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶36

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ARBITRATION AWARD DATED 26.04.2021. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.07.2022 IN I.A.NO. 2 OF 2022 IN C.M.A (ARBITRATION) NO. 57/2022 ON THE FILES OF THE ADDITIONAL SUB COURT-II, THRISSUR. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT, TO THE PETITIONER UNDER FORM 37.

Remitha Manoj v. M/S.Tata Capital Finance Service Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Remitha Manoj v. M/S.Tata Capital Finance Service Ltd.

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

M/S Rehaboth Indian Gypsy New Life Trust Vs Union of India

Sri Mamanikunnu Mahadevi Templ,E, Vs Income Tax Officer

Sri Mamanikkunnu Mahadevi Temple, Vs Income Tax Officer

Smitha Sanal, Vs Paul Fernandas

Fins Engineers and Contractors (P) Ltd., Vs Superintendent

Sujeesh P.S Vs State of Kerala