Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court

Tarakeswar Nath Tewari vs Indusind Bank Ltd on 12 August, 2013

Author: Sanjib Banerjee

Bench: Sanjib Banerjee

                            AP No. 823 of 2013
                    IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                     Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction



                       TARAKESWAR NATH TEWARI

                                   Versus

                            INDUSIND BANK LTD.


BEFORE:

The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE

Date : 12th August, 2013.

Mr. Aniruddha Mitra, Adv. appears The Court : This is the hirer's petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in respect of a hire-purchase transaction.

The petitioner claims that the finance company forcibly took possession of the asset without making a previous demand and thereafter sold the asset without informing the petitioner. The finance company has denied that it took forcible possession of the asset and relies on certain documents which demonstrate notice being issued before the possession of the asset was taken over by the men and agents of the finance company.

The petitioner says that after the finance company took possession of the asset, the petitioner had offered to settle the entire claim of the finance 2 company at Rs.9 lakh. Prima facie, upon such assertion being made, it is evident that the petitioner does not object to the possession being taken over by the finance company and no other grievance in such regard may be entertained. However, inasmuch as the petitioner says that the asset was sold by private treaty without the finance company seeking to obtain the best price therefor, the petitioner will be entitled to take appropriate steps against the finance company in accordance with the arbitration agreement between the parties.

The finance company says that an award has been passed on May 30, 2013 in favour of the finance company. It will also be open to the petitioner to challenge the award in accordance with law.

Since the asset has been sold, nothing remains in this petition under Section 9 of the 1996 Act and the same is disposed of by leaving the parties free to work out their remedies in accordance with law.

There will be no order as to costs.

Certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be urgently supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.

(SANJIB BANERJEE, J.) kc.