SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Kar) 163

V.G.SABHAHIT
SHAMASUNDER V. KAMATH – Appellant
Versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR TRANSPORT – Respondent


Advocates:
NILOPHAR AKBAR, P.S.RAJAGOPAL

V. G. SABHAHIT, J.

( 1 ) THIS Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner for Transport, Belgaum, dated 27/10/2005 in Appeal No. TXA/22/2004/05 wherein while dismissing the appeal, the Appellate authority has confirmed the order passed by the Regional Transport Officer dated 7/2/2005.

( 2 ) THE grievance of the petitioner in the Writ Petition is that the petitioner had purchased two vans bearing registration Nos. KA 22/ A 3222 and KA 22/a 3444 under hire purchase agreement entered with the third respondent Bank. It is averred that the petitioner was put in possession of the said vehicle. The registration certificate issued by the Registering Authority shows the name of the petitioner as the owner and entry has been made in each of the certificate of registration of the vehicles regarding existence of hire purchase agreement with the third respondent financier. Due to manufacturing defects in the vehicles, the petitioner could never operate the vehicles profitably and they could not regularly and punctually pay the hire charges and the third respondent financier repossessed the vehicles pursuant to the









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top