Disposes of an infructuous writ petition seeking direction against coercive recovery of a hypothecated truck by a finance company without following mandatory Supreme Court procedures.
Disposed of the writ petition as infructuous due to efflux of time without granting any relief.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.9627 of 2016
Debaraj Baliarsingh
Petitioner None
-versus-
Branch Manager, Srei Equipment Finance Ltd. & Another
Opposite Parties None
CORAM: JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO
ORDER (Oral) 30.01.2023 Order No. (Hybrid Mode)
03. 1. The petitioner is stated to have raised a loan of Rs.26,80,000/- on 15.05.2013 from Srei Equipment Finance Limited/O.P. No.1 for purchase of a Truck. It is claimed that the EMIs were regularly paid till the month of April, 2016, however the Bank has issued a statement requesting the payment of an amount of Rs.2,60,503/- as principal and interest.
The prayer in the instant writ petition is for a direction not to forcibly seize the hypothecated Truck without following the procedure mandated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ICICI Bank Ltd. V. Prakash Kaur and Others, reported in (2007) 2 SCC 711 .
// 2 //
2. This Court while issuing notice passed the following order on 08.06.2016:
“Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
Let notice be issued to opposite parties by speed post making it returnable by three weeks, requisites for which shall be filed within three days.
List this matter after four weeks.
In the interim, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in respect of the outstanding dues subject to the petitioner depositing Rs.3,00,000/- (rupees three lakh) before the opposite party No.1 within two weeks from today.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.”
3. None has put in appearance on behalf of either of the parties, understandably due to efflux of time rendering probably the claim as infructuous.
4. In view of the above, writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
(M.S. Sahoo) Judge
AKK 30th January, 2023 Cuttack
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition filed to restrain recovery without following Supreme Court guidelines is maintainable.
Whether the writ petition became infructuous due to efflux of time.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
ICICI Bank Ltd. V. Prakash Kaur and OthersReferred¶11
(2007) 2 SCC 711 · Who else cites this
Debaraj Baliarsingh
Branch Manager, Srei Equipment Finance Ltd.
Jaswant Singh
M.S. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
