Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 20 (ORI)

Truptimayee Paikray v. State Transport Authority

2012-01-10

B.N.MAHAPATRA, V.GOPALA GOWDA

body2012
ORDER 10.01.2012 - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for issuance of a direction to opposite party Nos.1 and 2 not to change the ownership of the vehicle bearing Registration No.OR-02-AX-9804, which has been seized on the ground of non-payment of loan instalments. Further prayer of the petitioner is for issuance of a direction to opposite party Nos.3 and 4 not to take possession of the said vehicle and to give her some more time to pay the balance amount. 3. Learned counsel appearing for opposite party No.4 placing reliance on the counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party Nos.3 and 4 submits that since the petitioner did not pay the defaulted instalments, opposite party No.1 refer the matter to arbitration. On 04.04.2011 the learned Arbitrator passed award as against the petitioner- Truptimayee Paikray and her guarantor declaring that opposite party No.3 is the owner of the "machine" and in case the petitioner pays a sum of Rs.12,35,212/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of passing the award till the date of realization and the cost of Rs.15,000/- to opposite party No.3, the petitioner shall continue in possession of the machine. But the petitioner has not complied with the said award. Therefore, according to opposite party No.3, the said award has attained finality and this Court should not interfere with the matter. 4. It appears that opposite party Nos.3 and 4 are not instrumentality of the State Government and also do not come under the purview of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, this Court cannot exercise its discretionary power under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and no writ of mandamus as prayed for by the petitioner, can be issued against either of the opposite parties. 5. In this view of the matter, this Court cannot grant any relief in favour of the petitioner as prayed for in this writ petition since the award dated 04.04.2011 passed by the learned Arbitrator has attained finality and the petitioner has not complied with the same. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed being devoid of merit. Petition dismissed.