Jagdish Sharma v. Tata Motors Finance

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.19222 of 2012 Jagdish Sharma .....

Petitioner Mr. Suryakanta Behera, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ranjan Kumar Rout, Advocate -versusTata Motors Finance Ltd. and others ....

Opp. Parties Mr. Ramachandra Panigrahi, Advocate (For Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2)

CORAM:

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

25.08.2022 1.

1.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

2.

Petitioner apprehending forceful seizure of his vehicle bearing registration No.OR-14-S-3594 has approached this Court for a direction not to seize the said vehicle. 3.

Mr. Behera, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. Rout, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays for an adjournment. 4.

Mr. Panigrahi, learned counsel for the Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2-Financier submits that the loan account of the Petitioner in respect of the aforesaid vehicle has been closed and NOC has already been issued. Hence, the writ petition has become infructuous.

5.

In view of such submission, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous with an observation that the Petitioner is at liberty to move this Court for revival of the writ petition, if cause of action, if any, still survives within a period of one month from today.

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge s.s.satapathy