Madras High Court
R.D. Dharanidharan vs M/S Shiram Transport Finance Company on 6 January, 2020
CRP.(NPD).No.1806 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 06.01.2020
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
CRP.(NPD).No.1806 of 2011
R.D. Dharanidharan ... Petitioner
Versus
1.M/s Shiram Transport Finance Company,
rep.by V.Saravanan,
Puducherry.
2.S.V.Raja ... Respondents
Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure
Code, praying to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 29.01.2011
passed in EP. No.53 of 2010 in A.R.No.6 of 2007 on the file of the I
Additional Subordinate Judge at Cuddalore.
For petitioner : Mr.R.Gururaj
For Respondents : No Appearance
ORDER
The first respondent in the execution proceeding in EP.No.53 of 2010 is the revision petitioner herein.
2.The first respondent herein/M/s.Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, filed an Arbitration Proceeding in A.R.No.6 of 2007 in connection with the hypothecation of the vehicle i.e., Ashok Leyland Mini http://www.judis.nic.in 1 of 4 CRP.(NPD).No.1806 of 2011 Bus bearing Registration No.TN-57-N-0109 made by the petitioner herein. As per the terms and condition the loan amount is repayable in 35 installements, which was not paid regularly by the petitioner herein. The first respondent therefore approached the Arbitrator and an order was passed in favour of the first respondent in A.R.No.6 of 2007, dated 28.12.2007. To execute the same, the first respondent filed an execution petition in EP.No.53 of 2010 before the I-Additional Sub Judge, Cuddalore. Thereafter, for executing of the award, an attachment order was passed on the movable properties. By contending that the order of attachment is non-est in the eye of law the present revision petition has been filed.
3.Learned counsel for the revision petitioner would contend that he availed hypothecation loan from the first respondent herein for purchase of the Mini Bus to the tune of Rs.2,26,500/- and the amount has already been paid, due to which, an endorsement also made about the hypothication in the RC book of the said vehicle, which has been deliberately removed by the R.T.O. Subsequently, he sold the said vehicle to third party. Hence, the entire amount due in hypothication agreement has been discharged. However, suppressing the entire issues, Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd., has filed a baseless case before the Arbitrator and obtained the above said award. Further, the petitioner filed copy of the certificate issued by the R.T.O, which goes to show that there is no hypothication and executing the proceeding by way of order of attachment on the movable http://www.judis.nic.in 2 of 4 CRP.(NPD).No.1806 of 2011 properties in the house of the petitioner herein is illegal.
4.Taking into consideration, that there is no such endorsement of hypothication in the Registration Certificate of the vehicle, as mentioned by the first respondent herein I find that the execution proceedings are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the order of attachment passed by the I Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuddalore is set aside and the matter is remand back to the execution Court to consider the entire circumstances of the case and to pass appropriate orders. No costs.
06.01.2020 Index : yes/no Internet : yes/no Speaking/Non-Speaking order klt To The I-Additional Subordinate Court, Cuddalore. http://www.judis.nic.in 3 of 4 CRP.(NPD).No.1806 of 2011 RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN,J., klt CRP.(NPD).No.1806 of 2011 06.01.2020 http://www.judis.nic.in 4 of 4