Held that the petitioner must clear overdue EMI arrears on five trucks within two months to avoid repossession; failure permits respondents to act per law, disposing the writ.
Petitioner directed to clear overdue EMI on five trucks within two months; upon default, respondents may take action per law.
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.
[32e6 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF 5EPTEN,IEER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO: 2497 OF 2024
Between:
I.4 r. R. Rajanna, S/o. Narsaiah, Aged 40 years, Occ. Business, Rl/o H. No.2433, Angadi Bazar, ltrlandamarri, l\rlancherial, TS - 504231
..,PETITIONER
AND
,..RESPONDENTS
Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndiapraying that in the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Coufi maybe pleased to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.'1 in threating to seize the Truck bearing Registration No. TS 19 T 1664, TS 19 T 1699,TS 19 T 4099, TS 19 T 6699 and TS 19 T 4399 and sell the same as illegal, arbitrary,in violation of the rights guaranteed under Part-lll of the Constitution of lndia,in violation of the principles of naturaljustice and against theprinciples laid downby the Honourable Apex Court in decided cases and also the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of lndia/ Respondent No. 2 from time to time and consequently direct the Respondent No..1 not to seize the Truck bearing Registration No. TS19 T 1664, TS 19 T 1699, TS 19 T 4699, TS 19 T 6699 and TS 19 T 4399 subject to the payment of the overdue amount of Rs. 1,54,826.92ps. Rs. 2,04,786.65ps, Rs. 1,28,866.30 ps, Rs. 1,92,231.35 ps and Rs. 2.05.841 .56ps respectively in respect of the Trucks referred above within the time stipulated by the Honourable Court
I
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 1 not to seize the Truck bearing Registration No. TS 19 T 1664, TS 19 T 1699, TS 19 T 4699, TS 19 T 6699 and TS 19 T 4399 subject to the payment of the overdue amount of Rs. 1 ,54,826.92 ps, Rs. 2,04,786.65 ps, Rs. 1,28,866.30 ps, Rs. 1,92,231.35 ps and Rs.2,05,841.56 ps respectively in respect of the Trucks referred above within the time stipulated by the Honourable Court and pending disposal of the W.P.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. V MURALI MANOHAR
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI BHAGEERATH B
Counsel for the Respondent NO.2: --
The Court made the following: ORDER
L.
;
THE HON'BLESRI JUSTICEC.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.2497 of2O24
ORDDR:
This Writ Petitionis filed seeking the followingrelief:
'..-.issuea Wit or order or directionmore parTicularlg one in lhe ndture oJ Witof Mandamusdeclaing tlle oction of tlrc Respondent No 1 in thredteningto seize theTruckbeaingRegistrationJVo ?S 1s T 1664,'I'S 19 T 1699,TS19 T 4699,TS 19 T 6699 and TS 19 T 43gg andsell the sclmeas illegat, qrbitrary' in violotionof the iglrtsguaranteedunderPartJII of the Cotlstitutionof lndia in uiolation oJthe pinciplesof rLcituro'liustice and against the pinciples laiddown bg the Honourable Apex Courtin decided "o",""ond. alsothe gaid.elines issuedbg tlleReserue Bank of Ilrdjd/ respotudentNo,2 fromtime to time and consequentlg direct tl? respondentNo.l not to seizethe Truckbeaing RegistrationNo' TS 19 T1664,TS19 T 1699' TS 19 T 46ss'TS 19 T 6699andTS 19 T 43ggsubjectto the paAmentof the overdueamount of Rs.1,54,826.92ps.' Rs'2,04,786'65 ps' Rs 1'28'866'30ps' Rs.1,92,231.35ps. and Rs 2,05,841 56 ps' respectiuelg in respect of theTrucksrefeted aboue Ll/ithir. the time stipulatedbg the HonourableCourt.,. ."
basis by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited for transportation of Coal. It is the further case of the petitioner that, as there is delay in settlement of bills by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited, he had not paid the EMIs in time and therefore, respondent No.l, vide notice dated lZ.Ol.2O24, has demanded to pay the entire outstanding arnounts and threatened to repossess the vehicles without any further notice and soon after receipt of the said notice, he submitted explanation, dated 20.01.2024 requesting not to seize the Trucks. It is the further case of the petitioner that the said action on the part of the respondents in threatening to repossess the Trucks amounts to violation of the guidelines issued by respondent No.2-Reserve Bank of India and prayed this Court to direct respondent No. 1 not to seize the said vehicles.
3
SD/. N. CHANDRASEKHAR RAO ASSISTAN REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
\
SE ION OFFICER
To,
KKS
HIGH COURT
DATED:0510912024
ORDER
WP.No.2497 of 2024
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS
( oR lHE SL,
+ (
c-) '1
I tJ
I 2 7 |tl[/ 2024 I
Dr '.'r'r4-r C
q-
I It k1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petitioner can be directed to clear overdue EMIs to prevent seizure of trucks.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
I.4 r. R. Rajanna
IndusInd Bank Limited
Reserve Bank of India
C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
