IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 31ST AUGUST 2010 / 9TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 6776 of 2008(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- SABEENA BEEVI, KODOORVADAKKETHIL MUTTAM P.O., HARIPPADU, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA TRANSPORT DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL CORPORATION, TRANSTOWERS, VAZHUTHAKKAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SREERAM INVESTMENT LTD., REGD. OFFICE, 123, ANGAPPA NAIKKEN STREET, CHENNAI 60000. ADV. SRI.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL FOR R1 SRI.C.HARIKUMAR FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.6776/08 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE RELATING TO THE VEHICLE NO.KL 5N 7500 2003 MODEL ASHOK LEYLAND TOURIST BUS. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF REPAYMENT CHART ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT SHOWING THE DETAILS OF PAYMENT EFFECTED ON ACCOUNT OF HIRE PURCHASE TRANSACTION WITH THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 5.1.2008 TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF RECEIPTS EVIDENCING PAYMENT MADE BY THE PETITIONER TOWARDS HIRE PURCHASE AGREEMENT IN VEHICLE NO.KL 5N 7500. TRUE COPY T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.6776 Of 2008 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 31st DAY OF AUGUST, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the registered owner of Bus No.KL-5N-7500, a 2003 model Ashok Leyland Tourist Bus. The vehicle was purchased with hire purchase financial liability with the 1st respondent-Corporation from the previous owner. The 2nd respondent is a guarantor. 2. According to the petitioner, as on the date of purchase, there was a subsequent liability of Rs.7,06,903/-. The predecessor in interest of the petitioner had availed a loan amount of Rs.10 lakhs and the repayment schedule regarding payments made by him is produced as Exhibit P3. 3. According to the petitioner, the entire sum due to the 1st respondent has been cleared off thereafter and agreement period has also expired. The complaint raised in the Writ Petition is that 1st respondent is not issuing the statement of accounts for enabling the petitioner to get the clearance certificate from the 2nd respondent. 4. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent submitted that the 2nd respondent is the guarantor and the there was some default in payment of the loan and the 2nd respondent has remitted the amounts to the 1st respondent. The 2nd respondent has cleared the loan W.P.(C)No.6776/08 -2- account. It is pointed out that the statement of accounts are therefore with the 2nd respondent and not with the 1st respondent. 5. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent also submitted that in the light of the default made by the parties, they had to pay off the liability. 6. What is evident from the pleadings and the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the parties is that this case concerns clearance of liability out of a loan transaction. The petitioner seeks only a copy of the statement of accounts for him to proceed further in the matter properly. In that view of the matter, since the 2nd respondent is having a true and correct statement of account, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to issue a proper statement of accounts showing the details of payment and the amounts paid and the balance if any payable by the petitioner or his predecessor and the amounts paid by the 2nd respondent within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. dsn