IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD OCTOBER 2009 / 1ST KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 29617 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M/S.SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO. LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SHRIRAM INVESTMENTS LTD),HAVING ITS REGD.OFF.AT 123,ANGAPPA NAICKEN STREET,CHENNAI REP.BY P/A.HOLDER SRI.VENUGOPALAN P.T.,LEGAL CONSULTANT,M/S.SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE CO.LTD., SREEPADAM BLDG.,CHEROOTY ROAD,CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH NAMBIAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, MALAPPURAM. 2. ASHRAF N.K., S/O.UMMER, NAMBAN KUNNATH HOUSE, POST IRINGALLOOR, TIRUR. 3. YAKOOB, S/O.KAMMUKUTTY, PARAPPAN HOUSE, P.O.KIZHMURI, KUTTALLOOR, OORAGAM, MALAPPURAM. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 29617 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 23rd October, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the financier of a vehicle, which was purchased by the 2nd respondent. Since the 2nd respondent committed default in payment of the amounts due in respect of the purchase of the vehicle, the petitioner repossessed the vehicle and applied to the 1st respondent for issue of a fresh registration certificate, which was originally dismissed. The petitioner filed an appeal, in which the matter was remanded to the 1st respondent for re-consideration. The petitioner's grievance is that after remand, the 1st respondent is delaying re-consideration of the matter. 2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that there is no delay at all. According to him, the order of the appellate authority is dated 9-6-2009 and the matter was posted on 6-10-2009, on which date the petitioner was directed to produce certain documents and the advocate appearing for the petitioner took time to produce the same. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned is the contention of the learned Government Pleader. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will produce the documents and pursue the matter further. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach the 1st respondent appropriately. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.