Uti Bank Limited vs State Of Karnataka on 5 October, 2009

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Uti Bank Limited vs State Of Karnataka on 5 October, 2009

Bench: Huluvadi G.Ramesh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 05"?" DAY OF OCTOBER zaira
BEFORE I " I  

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HULUVAD_I;'G:;RA.M"ESii.' M' 

CRIMINAL PETITION N0.4*993 I013'.  k,     
BETWEEN:   A 2 j %

UT} Bank Limited,

No.9, M.G.Road,
Banga1ore~560001. 4_ . .  _  
Represented by its GPA Ho1def,._      _
MadhusudhaII.K.Manvi,A...   .. " V .
S/o R.K.Ma11v_i,~.,_  1

Aged ;Ibout %zir5eE%y;eaI§E.,',    ,  ...PETITIONER
(By Sri.M3,Ah/'a"aI1{I.,Sr,i,:NHgéiTaja Kegde, Advs.)

ANI): ~

I 1;, , State  .Ka.:nataka,

 V ,RepI"cs_ent'ec_i  the Inspector of Poiice,

% -  RajajiH'agar;Po1ice Station,

"-Rajajina,gar,
Banggiore-560010.

VA  ,'A2,.VTLMohVi'yuddin Khan,

V "S/*0 Hasan Khan,
2 Aged about 24 years,
No! 14, 11"' 'D' Cfoss,

'V



('J

I-Iosahalli Main Road,
Padarayanapura,
Bangalore-560026.

3. G.Naveen Kumar,

Proprietor,

Sushi] Auto Finance,  ' .. 
No.25, Chandrappa Mudalier Street,  ~ 

Sowcarpet,  _    
Chennai-600079. i  ...'REsPomENTs'

(By Sri.Honnappa,  for  
Sri.N.Deepak, Adv. for " '

This Cririiinail Petition': is» f11e'd...L1Iider Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. prayirig 't_o;;'.set._'aside theﬂimpugned order dt.8.8.07
passed by1the::_"I_V 'Bangalore in C.C.No.18514/05
which is iprodaced*at.»A1in-A' and -etc;

'}'his Criminal Petition cssisg assent admission this day,
the Court made the_fo11oWi--ng:'--  A V' "

 .Vf""~Petitioneii'».1ias soiigirit for to set aside the order passed by

 _ the"  nCMMz.,-Biangalore on the application filed by the

iirider -Section 459 of Cr.P.C. and to permit the

'kg;



petitioner to sell the MGV-Goods carrier Truck bearing

registration No.KA0l A 4453.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the pet_iti.oV_nerx_'  _
3. Petitioner said to have :i*ina'rieed1.prespoVndent*--Noi2

through respondent No.3. For the dei'ault'--in pa)iting:'the

of instalments by respondent complaiirit ~\fvas:'.lodged by the petitioner-company' 'arid d1.iririg. V"th.ei.eot1rse of investigation the vehicle was seized by...t.he_ *l.S"res:poiident;iOin the application filed by_the:_pet.itioneriforfthejiititerim custody of the vehicle, the Vehicle was'releasVe'd in favour of the petitioner. Since then the . _ ven.ie'1e:,_pis said toiihe""i'y'ing inlihe yard idle. Stating that the trial iis.¢_yet't.o:'be'Ct)Vi?tf1Vrt.ienCed and keeping the vehicle idle will reduce ltS"'«.Val1};1'a:Iltlti1at petitioner would not be in a position to recover"-'the amount and also that already he has sustained a loss, he has filed this petition for grant of permission to W seli the vehicle since the application filed by him before the court below under Section 459 of Cr.P.C. has been dismissed.

4. As pet' the submission made, the interim vehicle has been ordered in favour of the petit.i~onei5du'ring. 2GO'5--« .. *1' itself. The vehicle is said to be l'ying_-~~idlei'sir1ce"-then:.___ the grievance of the petitioner isilthat keeping the'isye~h_ietl.eVVidle custody will not realise, any amo.u:r1't.'due to petitioner from respondent No.2 though and accordingly, sought for perimsss ion.

V_ _5. perthe iiprolvsisions of Section 459 of Cr.P.C. to ' V' enable the 'pyetitionerguiho is a financier, to secure the amount subject::'to_vthe'-provisions of Sections 457 and 458 of Cr.P.C., petitioner is.3permitted to sell the vehicle. By imposing suitable conditions, a bond could be obtained by the learned Magistrate "¥ha'Vi'ng regard to the value of the vehicle. The order of the it wlearned Magistrate is modified to that extent permitting the 'M E, petitioner to dispose of the vehicie and to comply with the provisions of Sections 457 and 458 of Cr.P.C.

6. Accordingly, petition is disposed of.

Bkp.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court