SHIYAS MOHAMMED MUKKANNIYIL Vs. M/S.INDUSIND BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, who was the respondent in the contempt proceedings and the writ petitioner, as well as the learned counsel for the Bank.

(2.) Learned counsel for the bank submits that they are not interested in the appellant's bus. They are interested in payment of their dues. So long as adequate provision is made for payment of the dues they do not gain anything by seizing or detaining the bus.

(3.) On the other hand, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that by surrendering the bus no one will gain in as much as it would deprive the appellant the source of income using which he would liquidate the dues thus depriving the bank of its money. It would of no gain to the bank as by holding the bus they do not get the money. On the other hand, if the bus is released to the appellant, the appellant can make money and repay the loan.