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

DELHI HIGH COURT
PRATHIBA M.SINGH
ICICI Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sachin Kumar – Respondent


Table of Content
1. case background and financing agreement. (Para 2 , 3)
2. importance of timely decisions in similar cases. (Para 4 , 6)
3. court's directions for repossessing vehicles. (Para 5 , 8)
4. delay in trial court processing applications. (Para 7)
5. final order and dissemination of judgment. (Para 9 , 10)

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

CM APPL. 1032/2020 (exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.

CM (M) 19/2020

2. The present petition has been preferred by the Petitioner/Plaintiff - M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. (hereinafter, "Bank") challenging the impugned order dated 6th November, 2019, by which the Trial Court has simply adjourned the application filed by the Bank under Order XXXIX Rule 6 CPC, seeking permission to sell the hypothecated vehicle, which is currently in the Bank's custody.

3. The Respondent/Defendant (hereinafter, "Defendant") had entered into an agreement for financing of the vehicle. Due to defaults in payment by the Defendant, a suit for recovery was filed by the Bank, along with an application under Order XL Rule 1 CPC, for appointment of a receiver for the hypothecated vehicle, with power to sell. It is submi

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