Disposed

Gangadhar Khara v. R.T.O.Rayagada

Orissa HC2 Jul 2024WP(C)/11984/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition regarding repossession of a vehicle under an Indusind Bank loan. Court directed petitioner to approach the bank with the outstanding amount and directed the bank to resume proceedings or convince the auction purchaser to return the vehicle if already sold.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach Opposite Parties with entire outstanding amount; Opposite Parties directed to consider vehicle return or convince auction purchaser to return vehicle.

Gangadhar Khara Vs R.T.O.Rayagada — Banking and Recovery | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.11984 of 2024

¶2

Gangadhar Khara …. Petitioner

¶3

Represented By Adv. Mr. D. R.Swain

¶4

-versus-

¶5

…. R.T.O., Rayagada & Ors. Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. Mr. R. C. Panigrahy

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

ORDER

Order No.

02.07.2024

1 . This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶13

2. The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition with a prayer for releasing of the vehicle TATA LPK bearing registered no.OD18F7605 in his favour.

¶14

3. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

¶15

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner availed loan from the Indusind Bank Ltd/Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3 for purchasing a vehicle with terms and conditions to pay EMI of Rs.53,700/-. The Petitioner used to pay the EMIs without fail as per the agreement. But, due to some financial difficulty, he was not able to pay four installments which is from

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

18.07.2023. Thereafter, the vehicle was repossessed on 24.11.2023 without prior information to the Petitioner. The Petitioner lodged an F.I.R and prayed for releasing of his vehicle. But no action has not been taken yet by the Opposite Parties.

¶19

5. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3 submits that the vehicle in question was already sold by the Bank with prior information to the Petitioner.

¶20

6. Considering the facts and circumstances, the Petitioner is directed to approach the Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3/Indusind Bank with the entire outstanding amount. The Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3/Induind Bank shall consider the case of the present Petitioner on payment of the entire outstanding amount by the Petitioner. Further, If the vehicle in question has already been transferred to the auction purchaser, the Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3/Induind Bank shall convince the auction purchaser to return the vehicle back .

¶21

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)

¶24

Digitally SignedSigned by: SUMITRA NAYAK Judge Designation: Jr. Stenographer Sumitra Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 04-Jul-2024 16:58:56

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Gangadhar Khara v. R.T.O.Rayagada

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gangadhar Khara v. R.T.O.Rayagada

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

Dipak Kumar Mohanty Vs State of Orissa

Sudhanidhi Pattnaik Vs State of Orissa

Dipak Ku.Mohanty Vs State of Orissa

M/S Balaji Motors Vs RBI

Panchayat Raj Servic Vs State and Ors.

Ganeswar Singh@Tupuli Vs State of Odisha