Kerala High Court
M/S.Indusind Bank Ltd vs The Regional Transport Officer on 18 March, 2016
Author: P.B.Suresh Kumar
Bench: P.B.Suresh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017/23RD POUSHA, 1938
WP(C).No. 35092 of 2016 (J)
----------------------------
PETITIONER :
-----------
M/S.INDUSIND BANK LTD.,
(VEHICLE FINANCE DIVISION),RAMA
BHAVAN,PARUTHELIPALAM,TOLL JUNCTION, EDAPPALLY,
KOCHI-682024,REPRESENTED B HY ITS
LEGAL EXECUTIVE AJAY.M.
BY ADVS.SRI.G.HARIHARAN
SRI.PRAVEEN.H.
SMT.A.ANJANA
SMT.K.S.SMITHA
SMT.T.T.SHANIBA
RESPONDENTS :
------------
1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
ATTINGAL,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695101.
2. MR.THOMAS,4/732, MANKATTUVILA,THANNIMOODU,
CHERUNNIYOOR,VARKALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695145.
3. SMT. STELLA,
4/732,MANKATTUVILA,THANNIMOODU,CHERUNNIYOOR,
VARKALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695145.
4. SMT.B.CHANDRIKA,ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER,
C/O.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
COURT,THIRUVAANTHAPURAM-695001.
R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. RAJI T. BHASKER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 13-01-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
bp
WP(C).No. 35092 of 2016 (J)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMET OF ACCOUNT AS ON
28.08.2016 RELATING TO THE LOAN ACCOUNT OF THE
2ND RESPONDENT WITH THE PETITIONER BANK FOR
VEHICLE NO.KL-16L-5942.
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.03.2016 IN
M.C.341/2016 PASSED BY THE CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE COURT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
bp
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
WP.(C).No.35092 of 2016-J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 13th day of January, 2017.
J U D G M E N T
The second respondent purchased a vehicle with the finance provided by the petitioner by way of loan. The third respondent is the guarantor to the said transaction. Respondents 2 and 3 did not re-pay the money borrowed from the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ('the SARFAESI Act') and approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate with an application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act for taking possession of the vehicle. On the said application, Ext.P2 order has been passed by the Magistrate appointing an advocate commissioner to take possession of the vehicle. It is alleged by the petitioner that the first respondent had seized the vehicle in the meanwhile on 21.3.2016 and as such, the advocate commissioner is unable WP.(C).No.35092/2016-J. 2 to execute Ext.P2 order. The petitioner, therefore, seeks appropriate directions in this regard.
2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the first respondent in this matter. Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the counter affidavit read thus:
"4. It is submitted that on 21.03.2016, the vehicles was seized by the Assistant Motor Vehicles Inspector and is being kept at Police Station, since the vehicle was operated without valid records and without valid Motor Driving Licence. Charge Memo of the check report was issued but neither the owner nor the petitioner responded so far to remit compounding fee. Hence the vehicle could not be released so far.
5. It is submitted that the offence is compounded for Rs.7500/- and the petitioner can remit the said amount at the Office counter and the vehicle can be released from the police station. The petitioner can use the vehicle after obtaining the current records and Fresh Registration Certificate in the name of the Financier."
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.
4. As evident from the counter affidavit, the stand taken by the first respondent is that if the petitioner is prepared to pay the compounding fee of Rs.7,500/-, the first respondent has no objection in taking possession of the vehicle by the WP.(C).No.35092/2016-J. 3 petitioner.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is prepared to pay the compounding fee mentioned in the counter affidavit.
In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to pay the compounding fee of Rs.7,500/- mentioned in the counter affidavit. It is also directed that if the petitioner remits the compounding fee as directed above, the vehicle shall be released by the first respondent to the advocate commissioner appointed as per Ext.P2 order.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.
Kvs/-
// true copy //