P.Moorthi v. Bank of Baroda
Case brief
What is this about?
Writ petition challenging enlistment of recovery agents quashed as subsistant adjournment due to verifiable counter affidavit.
What did the court decide?
None granted; petition closed based on counter affidavit.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 22.12.2020
C O R A M
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
Writ Petition No.29388 of 2010
&
M.P.No.1 of 2010 P.Moorthi ...Petitioner vs. Bank of Baroda, Rep. by its Senior Branch Manager, Nambiyur Branch, Kovai Road, Nambiyur, Gobichettypalayam Taluk, Erode District-638 458. ... Respondent PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the Respondent dated 25.11.2010 relating to the enlisting the services of the recovery agent for repossession of Tractor bearing Regn.No.TN33AW 4773 and Trailer bearing Regn.No.TN 33 4752 in respect of the Loan Account No.0552060000 2233 of the Petitioner herein and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd., Vs. Prakash Kaur and Others reported in 2007 (2) CTC 334 and further direct the Respondent to release and return the Tractor bearing Regn.No.TN 33AW 4773 and Trailer bearing Regn.No.TN 33 4752 forthwith.
In this writ petition, the order dated 25.11.2010 pertaining to the enlisting of the services of a recovery agent for re-possession of the tractor and trailer of the Petitioner in order to recover the alleged dues under the loan account of the Petitioner is under challenge.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
P.Moorthi
- respondent
Bank of Baroda
Coram
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court