G. Anand Ratan, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 4153 AP

      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

              WRIT PETITION No.15460 of 2020

ORDER:-

      The petitioner, who was the owner of vehicle bearing

No.AP 07 BT 404 had availed a loan facility from the 7th

respondent which required the petitioner to pay an equated

monthly installment for 24 months which was extended to 32

months on EMI of Rs.11,117/-, which was to be completed by

07.01.2022. It is the case of the petitioner that on 13.02.2021,

certain unknown people stopped the vehicle when it was on the

road and forcibly took away the vehicle from the petitioner on

the ground that the petitioner had defaulted in payment of the

installments to the 7th respondent. It is the further case of the

petitioner that despite the petitioner rushing to the office of the

7th respondent and offering to clear all the unpaid amounts, the

staff of the 7th respondent did not take any interest and directed

him to approach the head office of the 7th respondent, which is

the 8th respondent. The petitioner further submits that he

received a presale notice dated 03.02.2021 on 09.03.2021,

requiring him to pay Rs.1,80,252/-, within 15 days and despite

the petitioner seeking to make the payment, the staff of the 7 th

respondent refused to accept the said payments.

2. The petitioner thereafter is said to have received

messages, relating to the Fast Tag attached to the vehicle

showing that the vehicle was plying through various toll plaza

across the State. The petitioner having realized that his vehicle

was being used by a stranger made a representation to the 4th RRR,J

respondent on 23.04.2021, to take action in accordance with

the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The petitioner claims that since

the 4th respondent was not taking any action against the

respondents 7 and 8 and their officials, the petitioner had

approached this Court by way of the present writ petition.

3. The learned Government Pleader after obtaining

instructions had submitted, on 03.08.2021, that the transfer of

the ownership of the vehicle in the records of the transport

department, had been blocked and that neither of the

respondents 7 or 8 had approached the authorities for any

transfer of ownership of the vehicle. The 7th respondent filed a

counter affidavit, in which it is stated that the petitioner himself

had come forward and handed over the vehicle to the 7th

respondent officials as he was not able to pay the installments

on account of the Covid-19 pandemic. It is submitted that on

account of this voluntary surrender of the vehicle, the same had

been sold in an auction for a sum of Rs.52,000/-.

4. The petitioner contends that the terms of

repossession of the vehicle under the hypothecation agreement

between the petitioner and the 7th respondent requires

issuance of a notice, upon default of payment of installments,

with time being granted for making good the said default. It is

only upon the failure of the petitioner to make good the

defaulted amounts that the 7th respondent would go to the next

step of seizing the vehicle and selling the same by way of an

auction after issuing the pre-auction notice, as a last RRR,J

opportunity to the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that

the 7th respondent did not issue a default notice and had gone

ahead with the sale of the vehicle, after issuing a pre-sale

notice. The petitioner contends that on account of failure of the

7th respondent in issuing the default notice, the entire exercise

of seizure of the vehicle etc., is in violation of the agreement and

that the petitioner would be entitled to approach this Court as

the 4th respondent-Transport Authority was not willing to

exercise his discretion in stopping further transfer of the

vehicle. The petitioner relied upon the Judgments of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd

v. Prakash Kaur and Ors.1 The 7th respondent relied upon the

Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Magma Fincorp

Limited v. Rajesh Kumar Tiwari2, on the rights of a financier

to take possession of a vehicle when there is default in payment

of the finance amount due to the finance year.

5. In the present case, the petitioner contends that the

vehicle was forcibly taken away from him while the 7th

respondent contends that the petitioner had voluntarily handed

over the vehicle as he was unable to pay the installments. This

is a question of fact which cannot be decided by this Court on

the basis of the material placed before this Court. It would

require a further enquiry before the actual truth can be ferreted

out. Apart from this issue, the petitioner except roping in the

4th respondent on the ground of in action of the 4th respondent,

has not made out a case as to how a writ petition would be

AIR 2007 SC 1349

(2020) 10 SCC 399 RRR,J

maintainable against the actions of the 7th respondent, which is

a private organization, carrying on business with a profit motive

and cannot be treated as a part of the State.

6. As far as, the 4th respondent is concerned, a counter

affidavit has been filed by the 4th respondent stating that the 4th

respondent had issued Memo vide R.No.558/B3/2021, dated

01.05.2021 to all the Motor Vehicle Inspectors and Assistant

Motor Vehicle Inspectors in Guntur District with instructions to

book a case and seize the said vehicle if it is found without valid

records of ownership and that the authorities had also blocked

further transactions relating to the transfer of ownership of the

above vehicle.

7. In view of the above discussion and the submission

of the 4th respondent that further transfer had been blocked

and that the transport authorities under his jurisdiction have

been directed to take necessary action whenever, the said

vehicle is found travelling without ownership documents, the

present writ petition is closed.

8. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed, leaving it

open to the petitioner to avail of his remedies. There shall be no

order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in this Writ

Petition shall stand closed.

___________________________________ JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO Date : 21-10-2021 RJS RRR,J

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

WRIT PETITION No.15460 of 2021

Date : 21-10-2021

RJS