B.N.PATNAIK
Ashok Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Balaraman – Respondent
ORDER
B.N. Patnalk, J. - This is a petition filed under S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the F.I.R. in crime No. 42/96 of Mukkom Police Station.
2. The petitioner is the proprietor of M/s. Kothari Investment, Madras. The firm is engaged in the business of the financing the intending purchase of motor vehicles. The firm advanced certain amounts to one Chandran to purchase the vehicle KLZ 8145 on a hire purchase agreement. The petitioner also advanced a loan to one Balakrishnan to purchase vehicle No. KRD 2799 on hire-purchase agreement. Sri Balakrishnan, stood as surety for the loan amount taken by Chandran. One of the conditions of the hire-purchase agreement with Balakrishnan is that in case of default in payment of installment dues by Chandran his vehicle (KLZ 8145) can also be seized. While the hire purchase agreement was in force, Chandran sold the vehicle to one Raghupathi Raghupathi in turn sold the vehicle to the complainant in, the said crime case, who 1s the first respondent herein. It, is admitted in the complaint petition that the sum of Rs. 4,500/- was still due to the petitioner in terms of the hire-purchase agreement in respect of vehicle No. KLZ
Sardar Trilik Singh v. Satya Deo Tripathi. 1979 (4) S.C.C. 396. (Para 6)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.