S. Zaheer Ahamed, v. The Reserve Bank Of India,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 27347 of 2011 ORDER:

As there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on 14.07.2015, the matter was listed to today under the caption "for dismissal". Even today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner either in the morning or in the afternoon session. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the petition. On the otherhand, learned counsel for the respondents was present on both the occasions.

The present writ petition is filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the second respondent in detaining the documents i.e. National Permit and Insurance Certificate of the petitioner's vehicle bearing No. KA-01B-169, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Hire Purchase Act, 1972. The short question that arises for consideration is whether a writ petition would lie against the second respondent for detaining the National Permit and Insurance Certificate.

In similar circumstances this Court in W.P.Nos.37608 of 2012 and batch passed the following order:

"The petitioners in these cases are individuals who obtained vehicle loans from the second respondent, a private finance company. These writ petitions are filed assailing the action of the said finance company in trying to re-possess the vehicles purchased by the petitioners through the said loans. The Reserve Bank of India is impleaded as the first respondent in all the writ petitions but the affidavit does not even mention the Reserve Bank of India or allege that any circular instructions or regulations framed by the said bank have been violated by the second respondent finance company in dealing with the petitioners. The matters throw up purely contractual disputes involving the petitioners and a private finance company. The public law

remedy of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be availed to redress such contractual disputes arising between private parties and accordingly dismissed the writ petitions."

Since the issue involved in the said case is identical to the case on hand, the writ petition is not maintainable and accordingly, the same is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

_________________________ JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR 15.07.2015 gkv