IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS TUESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2010 / 25TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17428 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SUMAN K.P.S/O.PREMADAS AGED 25 YEARS, KUNNATH HOUSE, PARUTHIPARA SHORNAUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.GEORGE SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD. 2. CIRCLE INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, OTTAPALAM. 3. SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, SHORNAUR. 4. BABU, ATTANIKAL HOUSE, KAILAD, SHORNAUR. 5. SHOBHANA, ATTANIKAL HOUSE, KAILAD, SHORNAUR. G.P. SHRI T K VIPINDAS FOR R1 - 3. ADV. SRI.DEVAPRASANTH.P.J. FOR R-6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 17428 of 2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF RC BOOK OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REG. NO. KL 51 - 9479. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT DT. 5.11.2008. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF DEMAND DRAFT DT.29.5.2010. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL // TRUE COPY// K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 17428 of 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs: i) call for the entire records relating to the case; ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding respondents 1 to 3 not to harass or trouble the petitioner in any manner at the instance and instigation of respondents 4 and 5. iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, commanding respondents 4 and 5 not to resort to police interference for compelling the petitioner to surrender the vehicle bearing Reg.No. KL 51- W.P.(C).No. 17428 of 2010 2 9479 on the reason of default of loan instalments instead of initiating appropriate civil remedy.” 2. Briefly the case of the petitioner is as follows. The petitioner had purchased a vehicle from respondents 4 and 5 as per Ext.P2 agreement. As per the agreement he agreed to repay the balance 34 monthly instalments regularly. Upto February 2010, he had paid the instalments without fail. He could not pay the amount in March and April. In the first week of April, petitioner managed to raise amount for one month and went to make the payment. But the financier refused to accept the amount. Thereupon the petitioner sent a Demand Draft in favour of the financier. It is submitted that at the instance of respondents 4 and 5 the financier refused to accept the loan instalment amount from the petitioner and there is harassment at the hands of police officials. 3. As per I.A. 7318 of 2010, the petitioner had impleaded the financier as Additional 6th respondent. The learned counsel for the 6th respondent points out that under the guise of this Writ Petition, the W.P.(C).No. 17428 of 2010 3 petitioner is trying to raise a claim in between the petitioner and the 6th respondent. According to the 6th respondent there is no privity of contract between the petitioner and 6th respondent and the 6th respondent has no obligation towards the petitioner. 4. Having heard counsel for the parties, we dispose of the Writ Petition. We make the interim order absolute. We make it clear that we have not gone into the contentions of the 6th respondent. We are not pronouncing on the allegations of the petitioner vis-a-vis the 6th respondent. We leave it open. (K. M. JOSEPH) Judge (M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS) Judge tm