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

2011 Supreme(All) 1571

SATYA POOT MEHROTRA, RAJESH CHANDRA
Mumtaz Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. Thru Secy. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Shiva Kant Srivastava
C.S.C.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner took loan from the respondent no. 4 (Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd.) for purchasing a Truck. The petitioner committed default in payment of loan. Consequently, a Demand Notice dated 9th March, 2011 was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner had given reply dated 5-4-2011 to the said Demand Notice dated 9th March, 2011.

2. Copy of the said reply has been filed as Annexure 4 to the Writ Petition.

3. The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition, inter-alia, praying for directing the respondent no.4 (Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd.) to accept the balance amount in respect of the loan in easy instalments.

4. We have heard Shri Shiva Kant Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. From a perusal of the Writ Petition and Annexures thereto, we find that Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. is a registered Company under the Companies Act, 1956. The said Company is not a Government Company, nor is covered under the definition of? "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. No statutory duty on the part of the said Company, namely, Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. is shown to have been violated. The transaction between the petitioner a




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