Writ petition challenging demand of further loan amounts and threatened vehicle seizure; dismissed for default as petitioner did not appear even at the second call.
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.
[3405 ]
HIGH COURT - FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (SPecial OriginalJurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THETHIRD DAYOF DECEMBER TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLEJUSTICEMOUSHUMIBHATTACHARYA
WRIT PETITION NO: 3389 40F 2024
Between:
Dinesh Soni,S/o. MohanlalSoni, Age about 55 Years'Occ BusinessRl/o' F;in;. il 0 1'. c iir il,tanio"uiowbr{aj enoranasar'Hvderabad'
...PETITIONER
AND
Petition underAtticle226 of the Constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the circumstancesstatedin the affidavitfiled therewith'the High Courtmaybe pleased to issue awrit or order or direction' more in the nature of a Writof Mandamus,declaringthe actionof the RespondentNo 2 in demanding further amountpursuant to the loan accountNo 6998698 with respect to the petitioners Car bearingReg No TS07HK2789by issuingthe settlement letterdated 2l.lo.2024andthreateningtoseizethevehiclewithoutfollowingtheprocedure contemplatedunder the Statuteas arbitrary' unlawful'iniquitousand consequentlydirect the respondents not to interfere
lA NO: 1 oF2024
Petition underSection 151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in the affidavitfiled in supportof the petition' the HighCourt may be pleasedto direct theRespondent No.2herein not to interfere with the PetitionerCar bearing Reg No TSO7HK2789without followingthe procedure contemplatedunder the
Statute with re:i[)ect to Loan fuc No.6998698 pending disposal of writ petition in the interest of ju;tice and equity
Counsel for thr-, petitioner: SRI. S. M. SAIFULLAH
Counsel for the Respondents: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR Dy. SOLICTTOR GEN. OF tND|A
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON,BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMIBHATTACHARYA
WRIT PETITION N0.338940F 20.24
ORDER
No one appears forthe petitioner even at the time of second
call.
is accordinglydismissedfor default.
Interim orders,if any,sha1l stand vacated'There shall be no
order as to costs
^,;+"ir+ls'tFE,/ SECTIONSFFICER trrRuEcoPY'l
\
B.;83Y3'l'ont ot
fo, 3^$i8Ar""lstff ^Y"f
1trSbtflfl
BM
]
HIGH COL,RT
DATED:0it11212024
ORDER
WP.No.33B94 ot 2024
--t.e ST iiE
) .^
P
70iil a
'l ' U[[ -.,
- l)E:; nA' Cia)
=-:-
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION FOR DEFAULTH WITHOUT GOSTS \e
\o.r,.\Y 5rr4"sl
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Dinesh Soni
Reserve Bank of India, Rep by its Manager, Office Saifabad, Hyderabad
Mahindra Finance Ltd., Rep by its Authorised Person, Mumbai
Union of India, Rep by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi
Moushumi Bhattacharya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
