AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 224 wordsRupinderjit Chahal, J
Through the instant petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS of 2023, the petitioner prays for issuance of direction to the official respondents No.1 to 3 to ensure that private respondents No.4 and 5 will not interfere in the free plying of the vehicle of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner on asking for the relief (supra) has placed reliance upon the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases of Citicorp Maruti Finance Ltd. V/s Svijayalakhsmi 2012(1) SCC 1, ICICI Bank Ltd. Versus Parkash Kaur and others (JT-2007(4) SC 39) and Bank of India & Anr. v. Debasish Bosu Roy Chowdhury SLP(C) Nos.16082-16083/2024, decided on 20.08.2024, and the judgments of this Court in the cases of Narinder Kumar Singla versus State of Punjab (2006(3) RCR 890) and M/s Sundaram Finance Ltd. Versus Raj Kumar & others 2011(4) RCR (Crl) 890, and submits that the recovery of loan or seizure of vehicles could be done only through legal means.
Without issuing notice of motion in the present petition, a direction is issued to the official respondents No.1 to 3 to take necessary steps to ensure that private respondents No.4 and 5 will not cause any obstruction in the plying of the petitioner's vehicle, except in accordance with due process of law.
Disposed of accordingly.