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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 57062

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
M/S. INDUSIND BANK LTD – Appellant
Versus
JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 24949 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.G.HARIHARAN, SRI.PRAVEEN.H., SMT.K.S.SMITHA, SMT.B.R.SINDU, SRI.V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR, SMT.AFNA V.P., SHRI.V.ROHITH
For the Respondents: SMT.ALKA WARRIAR, CGC, SRI.C.DHEERAJ RAJAN, SHRI.HEMANTH HARI, SMT.SETHU S. KRISHNA, SMT.AZOONTHA ABRAHAM, SHRI.ANAND KALYANAKRISHNAN, SHRI.LIBIN VARGHESE, SMT. DEVI, SHRI.R., GP

Court emphasized due process in vehicle registration and financing, directing timely consideration of requests.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The judgment concerns the writ petition for a direction to cancel the blacklisting of a vehicle and the HP endorsement in accordance with relevant statutes applicable to vehicle registration and financing agreements. Facts of the Case: The petitioners sought relief regarding the blacklisting of a vehicle involved in a loan agreement and provided evidence of compliance with the financial obligations by submitting a No Objection Certificate.

Findings of Court:
The court directed the respondent to consider the request based on existing evidence, emphasizing the necessity of due process.

Issues: Whether the 1st respondent should cancel the blacklisting and consider the HP cancellation request.

Ratio Decidendi: The court underscored the importance of adhering to established legal duties and processing requests in a timely manner as reinforced by previous judgments.

Result: Appropriate orders shall be passed within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Table of Content
1. request for vehicle blacklisting cancellation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. loan and indemnity bond execution. (Para 3)
3. government response and compliance standard. (Para 4 , 5)

J U D G M E N T

The writ petition seeks a direction to the 1st respondent to cancel the blacklisting of the vehicle mentioned in Ext.P1 and also to consider the request for cancellation of the HP endorsement made in the registration certificate of the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-53K- 5741. The 2nd petitioner submits that the issue is covered in his favour by Ext.P9 judgment of this Court in WA No.1756 of 2023.

2. It is submitted that the 2nd petitioner had availed a loan from the 1st petitioner Bank for the purchase of a JCB bearing Registration No.KL-53K-5741. The said vehicle was covered with a hypothecation availment with M/S Shakthi Finance Ltd, Palakkad, the additional 4th respondent.

3. The 2nd petitioner approached the 1st petitioner for the purchase of the vehicle for providing an advance loan of Rs.7,10,000/-, which was granted by the 1st petitioner. The registered owner of the vehicle had executed an indemnity bond in favour of the 1st petitioner, along with the 2nd petitioner, undertaking the liability to pay a sum of Rs.7,10,000/-, towards the amount advanced by the 1st petitioner. Consequent to the payment of the amount due to the existing finance, namely, Shakthi Finance Ltd., Palakkad, on 15.03.2024, they have issued an NOC for effecting cancellation of HP and the required Form under Form No.35 for effecting termination of the HP endorsement was also addressed to the 1st respondent, as seen from Ext.P6. It is in that background that the writ petition is filed with the prayers stated above.

4. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the request of the petitioners was not considered on account of the objection from the additional 3rd respondent.

5. Taking note of the fact that Ext.P6 is pending consideration before the 1st respondent, there will be a direction to the said respondent to pass orders on the same, in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioners and additional respondents 3 and 4. Appropriate orders shall be passed within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say, Ext.P9 judgment shall also be adverted to while taking a decision, as directed above.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

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 Back to top