PRAMIL BANERJEE Vs. HDFC BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is to the order no.16 dated August 21, 2009 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, 10th Bench in Title Suit No.1020 of 2009 thereby rejecting an application dated June 23, 2009 filed by the plaintiff.

(2.) THE plaintiff / petitioner herein instituted a suit being Title Suit No.1020 of 2009 for declaration and permanent injunction against the opposite party. THE opposite party entered an appearance and it is contesting the said suit. THE plaintiff took a loan of Rs.3,18,000/- from the opposite party / bank on condition to repay the said amount in 60 equal monthly installments at the rate of Rs.7,657/- per month. THE said loan was taken for the purpose of purchasing a vehicle which was hypothecated to the bank. THE plaintiff was not able to repay the loan entirely and when the opposite party intended to take possession of the vehicle-in-question, the plaintiff filed the suit for the reliefs stated in the suit. He prayed for temporary injunction also. It was granted on condition that the vehicle-inquestion would not be seized, provided the plaintiff was able to make a payment of Rs.20,000/-. THE plaintiff failed to make the payment as per direction of the Court and as such, the said vehicle was seized from the possession of the plaintiff on June 19, 2009. THEn the plaintiff prayed for injunction again by filing the said application. At the time of hearing of the said application, the bank informed that the vehicle had already been sold to one Taj Khan on June 29, 2009. So, the application was rejected. Being aggrieved, this application has been preferred. Now, the question is whether the impugned order should be sustained.

(3.) THUS, this being the position, in order to carve such type of action on the part of the bank, effective measures should be taken. Accordingly, the opposite party bank is directed to file an affidavit within two weeks from the date of communication of this order to the learned Trial Court to the effect whether he had actually sold the vehicle and if so at what price and to whom, it had sold the vehicle. If it is found from the affidavit that the vehicle had been sold by the defendant bank without waiting for any order from the Court, the bank shall give a security to the amount that it had obtained from the plaintiff by installments, so as to ensure repayment of the amount that is entitled by the plaintiff after deduction of the depreciation value of the vehicle for use. The learned Trial Judge shall give direction upon the defendant bank to furnish a security within a specified period as fixed by him. Thereafter, he shall proceed with the suit in accordance with law.