Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
D C Bank Ltd vs Ramji Lal Raigar &Anr on 19 April, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.15295/2009 D.C.Bank Ltd. Vs. Ramji Lal Raigar & Anr. DATE OF ORDER: 19.04.2011 P R E S E N T Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kumar Jain,J. Mr.Sanjay Gangwar, for the petitioner BY THE COURT:
At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, arguments were heard and writ petition is being disposed-off finally.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case as per averments made in the writ petition are that petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction against defendant-respondent No.1 to restrain the defendant from alienating or transferring the disputed truck on the ground that defendant had taken a loan of Rs.2 Lacs to purchase the said truck from the plaintiff Bank and he has not paid the due installments in time and there is possibility that defendant may transfer the said truck to third person. An application for appointment of receiver was also filed. Learned trial court allowed the application filed by plaintiff-petitioner vide order dated 1st October, 2008 and appointed Shri Kamal Sharma the authorised signatory of the plaintiff Bank as 'Receiver' and directed him to take possession of disputed vehicle immediately and to submit report in this regard. Thereafter, defendant filed an application under Section 151 CPC on 15th April, 2009 to the effect that he is ready to pay all the due amount of arrears, therefore, receiver be directed to hand over possession of the truck to him. Learned trial court vide its order dated 21.4.2009 disposed off the application and directed that in case the applicant/defendant is ready to deposit entire amount of due installments then receiver shall hand over the possession of the truck to him. Since no time limit was mentioned in the order, therefore, petitioner has preferred the present writ petition with a prayer to insert a condition in the order dated 21.4.2009 that if defendant makes payment of all the dues by a particular time then possession of the truck may be handed over to him.
3. Although such an application could have been moved in the trial court itself for inserting the said condition or for modification of the order, but for the reasons best known to the concerned officers of the Bank, the petitioner has preferred present writ petition before this Court.
4. The impugned order was passed way back on 21st April, 2009 and a period of almost two years have expired. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondent has not paid amount of due arrears of installments and custody of truck has not been handed over to him so far. It appears that the truck is not being used, neither custody of it has been given to the defendant nor it has been sold. Be that as it may, the impugned order is liable to be modified by making it clear that in case defendant make payment of the due amount till now to the Bank within a period of one month then receiver shall hand over the custody of the truck to him immediately.
5. Consequently, writ petition is allowed. Impugned order passed by trial court dated 21.4.2009 is modified and it is directed that in case defendant-respondent No.1 Ramji Lal Raigar makes payment of all the due installments payable to the Bank within a period of one month from the date of service of notice to this effect by the Bank or 'Receiver' then custody of the truck shall be handed over by the 'Receiver' to the respondent forthwith. The Bank will serve the notice upon the defendant within 15 days from today.
6. Looking to all the facts and circumstances, it is left open for the plaintiff Bank to move an application before the trial court seeking permission to sale the truck in case due amount is not paid by the defendant and custody of truck remains with the 'Receiver'. If such an application is filed then the same will be disposed off in accordance with law.
(Narendra Kumar Jain),J.
BKS/-