Final Order 1

Order Details: Other
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF :COURT 14 ASST SESSIONS JUDGE
Case No. :NOTICE OF MOTION/0103949/2019
Hamidullah Jalil Choudhary Vs M/s. Magma HDI General Insurance Co.
Ltd.
Date : 11102021
Business : Adv. Narvekar for plaintiff present. None
for deft. ORDER BELOW N/M NO.3949/19
Heard both sides. Perused the N/M, reply to
N/M and rejoinder affidavit of plaintiff.
Plaintiff contends that he has purchased
motor vehicle by taking finance assistance
from deft. He was making monthly
installments to deft. He has also taken out
insurance policy from deft. However, his
motor vehicle was stolen. He gave report
for the same. Concerned investigating
officer filed the ‘A summary report’ and said
‘A summary report’ was accepted by
Hon’ble Metropolitan Magistrate. Plaintiff
further submits that he is entitled to get
value of the motor vehicle from deft.
insurance company. But, deft. is trying to
take coercive action against plaintiff for
recovery of loan amount. By making these
submissions, plaintiff prayed to restrain
deft. from taking coercive action against
him for recovery of the loan amount. Deft.
by filing reply strongly objected the N/M. It
is submitted that deft. is not a financial
institution. It has not advanced loan
amount to plaintiff. Deft. is a company
dealing with the business of insurance.
Deft. is not concerned with the loan given
to plaintiff. By making these submissions,
deft. prayed to reject the N/M. Considered
the submissions advanced on behalf of both
the sides. As per copy of the account
statement filed on record along with plaint,
it is clear, as crystal, that deft. has not
advanced loan to the plaintiff. One ‘Magma
Fincorp Ltd.’ advanced loan to the plaintiff.
Deft. is an insurance company who has
insured plaintiff’s vehicle. As deft. has not
-- 1 of 2 --
advanced loan to the plaintiff for
purchasing the motor vehicle, there is no
question of taking coercive action against
plaintiff for recovery of loan amount. Thus,
plaintiff has failed to raise a fair question
against deft. which requires trial. Plaintiff
failed to establish primafacie case.
Therefore, he is not entitled to get relief of
temporary injunction as prayed for. In the
result, following order. ORDER 1. N/M
No.3949/19 is dismissed. 2. Costs in cause.
3. N/M No.3949/19 is disposed of
accordingly.
Nature of
Disposal
: DISMISSED
Disposal Date : 11102021
-- 2 of 2 --