In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated: 18.07.2008 Coram: The Honourable Mr.Justice M.CHOCKALINGAM and The Honourable Mr.Justice R.SUBBIAH Original Side Appeal No.314 of 2003 and C.M.P.No.14187 of 2003 Ms.Iffethirshad ..Appellant ..vs.. 1. The Official Assignee, High Court, Madras. 2. M.S.Seemasree ..Respondents Original Side Appeal filed against the order dated 10.09.2003 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in A.No.345 of 2003 in A.No.218 of 2003 in I.P.No.27 of 2003. For Appellant : Mr.V.Subramaniam for M/s.Mc Gan Law Firm For Respondents : Mr.R.Krishnasami, Senior Counsel for Official Assignee for R1 Mr.A.Balan for R2 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.,) Challenge is made to the order of a learned single Judge of this Court in allowing the Application No.345 of 2003 in Application No.218 of 2003 in I.P.No.27 of 2003. 2. This Court heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Senior Counsel for the Official Assignee as well as the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and looked into the order and grounds, on which the order is being assailed. 3. The appellant herein filed an application to set aside the ex parte order passed in Application No.218 of 2003, whereby a direction was sought for by the Official Assignee for the delivery of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ vehicle, bearing registration No.TN-02-M-4608 to the Official Assignee. Further, directions were issued for the seizure of the vehicle with the police aid by an order dated 21 .04.2003. 4. The only contention raised by the appellant before the learned single Judge was that actually, the original owner, namely, the 2nd respondent herein, has entered into hire purchase agreement for purchase of vehicle and further, the entire hire purchase agreement amount has been paid by the appellant and the title has actually been passed on and under the said circumstances, there was no need for the delivery of the vehicle. 5. It was brought to the notice of the Court by the appellant that the order passed in A.No.218 of 2003 with a direction to deliver the vehicle to the Official Assignee is an ex parte one and is liable to be set aside. Learned Judge, while passing the order, gave a direction to the appellant to hand over the vehicle to the Official Assignee on or before 12.09.2003 at 10.00 AM, failing which, coercive action was to be taken against her. 6. But, at this juncture, it is pertinent to point out that a perusal of the order would clearly indicate that nowhere it is stated as if the application seeking to set aside the ex parte order passed in A.No.218 of 2003 has been dismissed, but, on the contrary, it has reiterated its earlier order. It has to be noted that when a third party purchaser filed an application to set aside the ex parte order, where a direction was issued to surrender the vehicle to the Official Assignee, without taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the order came to be passed. In the considered opinion of the Court, it has got to be set aside and the matter has got to be remitted back for considering the contentions put forth by both parties and passing suitable orders on merits and in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of being heard to both the parties. Accordingly, the Original Side Appeal is allowed and the order passed by the learned single Judge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned trial Judge for the reasons stated above. Consequently, connected C.M.P.is closed. There will be no order as to costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar gl https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To 1.The S.A.R.,(Original Side) High Court, Madras 2.The Record Keeper, Record section (Original Side) High Court, Madras 1 CC To M/s.Mc Gan Law Firm, Advocate, SR NO.38463 O.S.A.No.314 of 2003 ssv(co) pmk/11.8.2008. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/