In this criminal revision, the High Court rejected the appeal of the petitioner challenging an order refusing to direct the financier to produce the seized vehicle. The court held that the matter was pending before the State Commission, precluding intervention.
The criminal revision case is dismissed. No costs.
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.
[3208 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA
CRIMINAL REVI SION CASE NO: 417 OF 2010
Criminal Revision case under section 397&401 of Cr.P.C against the Judgment daled 12-1-2OO9 made in Crlmp. 27 o'f 2OOO in CC 102 of 2005 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of I Class lVlahabubnagar
Between:
CHAND CHAUSH, Sio Hadi Chaush, aged 40 years, Occ: Agriculture H.No.732, Koilkonda Proper & Mandal, Mahabubnagar Dist.
...PETITIONER
AND
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.
...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI.B.DEVANAND [Not Present]
Counsel for the Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA
CRIMINAL REVISIO N CASE No.4l7 of 2010
ORDER
This Criminol Revision Cose ogoinst the order doted 12.01 .2009 in is filed in Crl.M.P.No.27 ot 2009 in CC.No.l02 of 2005 on the file of the Judiciot Moqistrole of First Closs. Mohobubnogor Districl.
,)
December, 2004 he poid on omounl Rs.I 5,000-/ to one Ashok Kumor, Monoger of the finonce compony. but he did nol credil the soid omount. As such lhe Finoncer pul the vehicle for ouciion sole ond issued notice uncjer Section lB(1 )(ii) of Hire Purchose Acl, 1972. The troctor wortlr of Rs.3,50.000/- wos seized by the finonce compony for the poyment of Rs.l ,66,424/- without considering his request, os sucl'r he opprooched lhe Districl Consumer Forum of Mohobubnoqor. The soicj forum ofler considering the orguments ond evidence of bolh sides, ollowed the comploinl portly ond direclecl the origirrol petitioner to poy on omount of Rs.i,33,483/- willr interesl ol tl-re rote of 9% p.o. from 06.05.2005 till the poyment io ihe conrploinont ond olso Rs.500/- towords costs of lhe conrploint wilhin orre month from ihe dole of communicolion of order. Tlre rests of the cloims of the comploinont ore disollowed
occordingly disnrissed the some. Aggrieved by the soid order, lhis Criminol Revision Cose is preferred.
4
oppellote Court ond it connot direct lhe finoncer lo produce the vehicle. There is no infirnrily in the order possed by ihe Judiciol Mogislrote Firsl Closs, Mohoboobnogor in Crl.M.P.No.27 of 2009 doled l2.Ol .2OO9
B. Accordingly, ihe criminol revision cose is dismissed
No cosis
Miscelloneous petitions. if ony. pending, sholl stond closed.
I
To,
,.r.i#+Hg+'xf8 //TRUE coPY/ t (i>
SECTION OFFICER
1 The J-udicral l,4agistrate of First Class l/ahabubnaoar 2 Two CCs to thepUBLtC PROSECUTOR, High Co"rrt for the State of Telan_gana at Hyderabad IOUTI 43 Two CD One CC to CopiesSRt B DEVANANTj Advocate topUCl KKS
ctlg
HIGH COURT
DATED:2510412023
1HE si4 I{.
t
I O
16 JU|| 2[8 :I
, !::r
ORDER
CRLRC.No.417 of 2010
DISMISS!NG OF THE CRLRC
0Ic b\Lt
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court could direct the financier to produce the vehicle during pendency of appeal before the State Commission.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Chand Chaush
The State of Andhra Pradesh
P. Sree Sudha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
