Skip to main content

Hire-Purchase - owner - buyer - ownership - financier - possession - force - movable property - Supreme Court

1) Trilok Singh & Ors. v. Satya Deo  Tripathi,  AIR  1979  SC  850
2) K.A. Mathai alias Babu & Anr. v. Kora Bibbikutty & Anr.,  (1996)
7 SCC 212
3) Charanjit Singh Chadha & Ors. v.  Sudhir  Mehra,  (2001)  7  SCC
417
4) M/s. Damodar  Valley  Corporation  v. The State of Bihar, AIR 1961 SC 440; 5) Instalment  Supply  (Private)  Ltd.  & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., AIR 1962 SC 53;
6) K.L.  Johar  &  Co.  v.  The Deputy Commercial  Tax  Officer,  Coimbtore  III,  AIR  1965  SC  1082; 
7) Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. State of Kerala & Anr., AIR 1966 SC 1178.



IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009
Anup Sarmah                                        ...Petitioner
                                   Versus
Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.                          ...Respondents

The  law  can  be  summarised  that  in  an agreement of hire purchase, the purchaser remains  merely  a  trustee/bailee on behalf of the financier/financial institution and ownership remains  with the latter. Thus, in case  the  vehicle  is  seized  by  the  financier,  no criminal action can be taken against him as he is  re-possessing  the  goods owned by him.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

MACT - Permanent disability - calculate - compensation - Supreme Court - Part 2

1) C. K. Subramonia Iyer vs. T. Kunhikuttan Nair - AIR 1970 SC 376 2) R. D. Hattangadi vs. Pest Control (India) Ltd. - 1995 (1) SCC 551 3) Baker vs. Willoughby - 1970 AC 467 4) Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. - 2010(10) SCALE 298 5) Yadava Kumar v. D.M., National Insurance Co. Ltd. - 2010 (8) SCALE 567) 5. The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following : Pecuniary damages (Special Damages) (i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure. (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising : (a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment; (b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability. (iii) Future medical expenses. Non-pecuniary damages (General Damages) (iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries. (v) Loss of ...
21 comments
Read more

Full & Final payment - No dues certificate - end of contract

Whether after the contract comes to an end by completion of the contract work and acceptance of the final bill in full and final satisfaction and after issuance a `No Due Certificate' by the contractor Supreme Court of India Supreme Court of India R.L. Kalathia & Co. vs State Of Gujarat on 14 January, 2011 Author: P Sathasivam Bench: P. Sathasivam, B.S. Chauhan IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3245 OF 2003 R.L. Kalathia & Co Appellant(s) Versus State of Gujarat .... Respondent(s) JUDGMENT P. Sathasivam, J. 1) This appeal is directed against the judgment and final order dated 07.10.2002 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat whereby the High Court set aside the judgment and decree dated 14.12.1982 passed by the Civil Judge, (S.D.), Jamnagar directing the State Government to pay a sum of Rs.2,27,758/- with costs and interest and dismissed the Civil Suit as well as cross objections filed by the a...
10 comments
Read more

Distinction between “Loss to the Estate” and “Loss of Estate”

A subtle but fundamental distinction between “Loss of Estate” and “Loss to the Estate” was discussed in Omana P.K. and others v. Francis Edwin and others (2011 (4) KLT 952). This Judgment was challenged before the Apex Court, which has now dismissed the Appeal. The question raised in this case, was whether a certain sum which the dependants received as compensation for untimely death of Judgment debtor in a motor accident is attachable in Execution Proceedings. In this case, Justice Thomas P. Joseph speaking for the Kerala High Court had held the following (relying on The Chairman, A.P.S.R.T.C, Hyderabad vs. Smt. Shafiya Khatoon and Others) Capitalized value of the income spent on the dependents, subject to relevant deductions, is the pecuniary loss sustained by the members of his family through his death. The capitalized value of his income, subject to relevant deductions, would be the loss caused to the estate by his death. In other words, what amount the dependents would have got le...
1 comment
Read more