High CourtsDivision Bench(2024) 05 DEL CK 3541

Bijender Chaudhary vs Malwa Leasing And Credits Pvt Ltd

Delhi High Court · Decided on 24 May 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J · Ravinder Dudeja, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
FAO (COMM) 101/2024 & CM APPL. 31224/2024 & CM APPL. 31225/2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 314 words

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1.

Appellant impugns order dated 02.05.2024 whereby the representative of respondent financial institution has been appointed as a Receiver to take possession of vehicle – TOYOTA FORTUNER bearing registration No. DL14CE3282, having Engine No. 1GDA289776, Chassis No. MBJGA3GS000384200-0219.

2.

Learned counsel for the respondent who appears on advance notice points out that the petitioner had taken a vehicle loan and had to pay monthly instalment of Rs. 67,500/- per month commencing from 25.03.2019 and the entire loan was to be discharged by 25.01.2023. He submits that as per the statement of account, the monthly instalments were never paid except for the first two instalments and thereafter there were irregular payments and as on 25.01.2023 the principal amount payable with interest was Rs. 31,68,000/- against which only Rs. 13,67,500/- was paid and the balance amount due, as on date with interest is Rs. 30,64,473/-.

3.

On a query put by the Court, learned counsel for the appellant submit that he is only in a position to pay about Rs. 17 lakhs as against the outstanding amount of Rs. 30,64,473/- which offer is not acceptable to the representative of the bank who is present in Court.

4.

Impugned order also notices that there is a default of 22 instalments by the appellant.

5.

Since admittedly the appellant has not honoured the finance agreement and has been completely irregular in payment of monthly instalments, we find no infirmity in the view taken by learned Commercial Court in appointing a Receiver for taking possession of the subject vehicle. On a query put by the Court to the appellant as to whether he is willing to surrender the vehicle, the answer is in the negative.

6.

Accordingly, we find no merit in the appeal. Appeal is consequently dismissed. It would be open to the Receiver to execute the order dated 02.05.2024 in accordance with law.