IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 8TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29519 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANILKUMAR B., AGED 58, S/O.A.V.BHARGAVAN, RESIDING AT JANAK, KEEZHATTINGAL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695101. BY ADV. SRI.P.PUSHPARAJAN SRI.SREEVALSAN.V SRI.K.C.KIRAN (ARUVIPPURAM) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695101. 3. THE MANAGER, TATA MOTORS (FINANCE), LAKSHMI BUILDINGS, BAKERY JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695014. 4. NATESAN, AGED 58, S/O.NARAYANAN, RESIDING AT 19/201, N.B.COTTAGE, SIVABHAVAN, ATTAKULAM, ATTINGAL, TRIVANDRUM, PIN-695101. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.29519 OF 2010(L) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner states that a vehicle belonging to the 4th respondent, who had availed of hire purchase facility from the 3rd respondent, was purchased by him. According to the petitioner, in terms of the agreement he had with the 4th respondent, he paid the entire amount to the 4th respondent, who in turn ought to have discharged the liability to the 3rd respondent. It is stated that though the petitioner thus discharged his liability, the 4th respondent did not make payments to the 3rd respondent. Petitioner now apprehends that with the assistance of anti-social elements, the 3rd respondent will take over possession of the vehicle by illegal means. It is stated that complaining of the above, he filed Ext.P6 compliant before the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent has not taken any action in the compliant. 2. Having regard to the facts as above and as none can take law into their hands for taking possession of vehicle under hire purchase has been upheld by the Apex Court in the WPC.No. 29519/2010 :2 : judgment in Manager ICICI Bank Ltd. V. Prakash Kaur & Others (2007(1)KKLT 894), it is directed that the 2nd respondent will take cognizance of the complaint filed by the petitioner, on the production of a copy of the judgment and needful shall be done in the matter. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/