Kerala High Court
WP(C)/12920/2025 of SILICONIA OASIS PVT. LTD., Vs TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, on 28 March 2025
W.P (C) No.12920/2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 12920 OF 2025 PETITIONER/S: SILICONIA OASIS PVT. LTD., AGED 62 YEARS REGISTERED ADDRESS 27/1466/ A , NEAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 12920 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
SILICONIA OASIS PVT. LTD.,
AGED 62 YEARS
REGISTERED ADDRESS 27/1466/A, NEAR PARAYANCHERI BUS
STOP, KUTHIRAVATTOM POST, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, NARIKKOLIL HAMEED, AGED 62 YEARS, S/O. MAMMU, PIN - 673016
BY ADVS.
DIPU JAMES
K.M.FIROZ
RESPONDENT/S:
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
TRANSPORT COMMISIONERATE, VAZHUTHACADU, THYCADU POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
KOZHIKODE, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673020
MUTHOOT MOTORS (COCHIN) JLR DIVISION,
N.H. BYPASS, KUNDANNOOR, COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, PIN - 682304
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.P.S.APPU, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner claims to be purchased a Range-Rover car from the 3rd respondent (M/s. Muthoot Motors). According to the petitioner since there were several defects in the vehicle, the 3rd respondent offered to refund the entire amount paid by the petitioner for purchase of the vehicle and accordingly refunded a sum of Rs.3,37,00,590/- to the petitioner and took back the vehicle purchased by the petitioner. According to the petitioner the petitioner is entitled to additional damages and costs incurred by the petitioner on account of the fact that the petitioner had availed a loan for purchase of the vehicle. This writ petition has been filed on the premise that the 3rd respondent is proposing to sell vehicle and the same may not be sold till the claims of the petitioner are settled by the 3rd respondent.
2. The learned Government Pleader points out that the issue as projected in this writ petition is purely a civil dispute between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent and filing of this writ petition invoking a public law remedy is nothing but an abuse of process of court.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2, I am clear in my mind that the learned Government Pleader is right in contending that in the facts and circumstances of the case noticed above, the filing of this writ petition is an
abuse of process of court as the remedy of the petitioner (the nature of the disputes between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent) does not lie in invoking the writ jurisdiction of this court. Writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. Very reluctantly, I refrain from imposing costs. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE AMG
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12920/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF VEHICLE PARTICULARS OF VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO. KL-11-CA-7282 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL COMMUNICATION DATED NIL ISSUED BY THIRD RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL DATED 19-6-2024 ISSUED BY PETITIONER TO THIRD RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF THE LOAN DETAILS OF PETITIONER ISSUED FROM AXIS BANK TO PETITIONER Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL COMMUNICATION DATED 24.10.2024 BETWEEN PETITIONER AND AXIS BANK Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL DATED 06.01.2025 ISSUED BY PETITIONER TO THIRD RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 14.02.2025 ISSUED BY K.M. MUSTHAFA, ADVOCATE TO SECOND RESPONDENT AND OTHERS Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 27.02.2025 ISSUED BY LEXVIRUEZ LLP TO K.M. MUSTAHFA, ADVOCATE Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13.02.2025 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 18.02.2025 ISSUED BY REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KOZHIKODE TO PETITIONER