FAO No.125 of 2010 Page 1 of 3 UNREPORTABLE * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO No.125/2010 Date of Decision: April 05, 2010 HDFC BANK LTD. ..... Appellant Through Mr. Punit K. Bhalla, Advocate versus RAMESH CHANDER SURI ..... Respondent Through None CORAM: HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE REKHA SHARMA 1. Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the ‘Digest’? No REKHA SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This appeal has been preferred against the order of an Additional District Judge, dated March 23, 2010 whereby the learned Judge has dismissed the application of the appellant under Order 40 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking appointment of a Receiver so as to take possession of vehicle, namely HONDA CITY 1.5 GXI bearing registration No.DL-8CJ-8170 for which the respondent had taken an auto loan from the appellant to the tune of Rs.3,60,000/- in February, 2008. As per the terms of the agreement, the loan was repayable in 36 monthly installments of Rs.12,835/- each. FAO No.125 of 2010 Page 2 of 3 The trial Judge by virtue of the impugned order has declined the relief prayed for, on the ground that the application was bereft of material details in as much as it neither disclosed the number of installments that had already been paid by the respondent, nor the date from which the default was committed. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the relevant details with regard to the loan are contained in the suit filed before the trial Judge in which the application under Order 40 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed and besides that, the appellant had also filed a statement of account before the trial Judge which clearly indicated the period up to which the installments had been paid and the month from which the default in making the payment was committed. It is further submitted that the respondent has so far paid only 11 out of 36 installments and as on March, 2010 he was in default of as many as 10 installments resulting in the recall of the loan on March 11, 2010. It is also submitted that in terms of the loan agreement, in case of default of installments the appellant is entitled to take possession of the vehicle from the respondent. Having regard to what has been noticed above, I am of the view that the facts and circumstances of the case warrant that the appellant be allowed to take possession of the vehicle. Accordingly, I appoint Mr. Sandeep L. Sharma/Amit Banerjee/Sanjay Sharma, representatives of the appellant-bank to take custody of the vehicle, namely HONDA CITY 1.5 GXI bearing registration No.DL-8CJ-8170 under their charge. The Officer/Officers on taking possession of the vehicle will issue an appropriate receipt to the person from whose FAO No.125 of 2010 Page 3 of 3 custody the vehicle has been taken and will also indicate therein the condition of the vehicle. The Officer/Officers shall ensure that the vehicle is kept in safe custody. In case there is any resistance from the respondent, the appellant shall be at liberty to take police assistance. With these directions, the appeal is disposed of. Dasti. REKHA SHARMA, J. APRIL 05, 2010 ka