Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Bhimrao Bajarang Chavare, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 25 March 2022 passed by the Competent Authority under Section 17(1) of the Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014. The order directed the return of four vehicles to respondent Nos. 7 to 10, who had complained that they had handed over the registration certificates of their vehicles to the petitioner as security for loans. The Competent Authority passed the order without issuing any notice or hearing the petitioner, who was in possession of the vehicles. The petitioner initially filed a criminal writ petition, which was later converted into a civil writ petition by a coordinate bench. The High Court noted that the complaints by respondent Nos. 7 to 10 were similarly worded and that the petitioner was not given any opportunity to be heard. The court held that the order was passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, as the petitioner was the person in possession of the vehicles and was directly affected by the order. The court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Competent Authority for fresh consideration, directing that all parties be given an opportunity of hearing. The court also directed the petitioner to produce the vehicles before the Competent Authority on the date of hearing and not to alienate or encumber them until further orders. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Natural Justice - Right to be Heard - Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014, Section 17(1) - The Competent Authority passed an order directing return of vehicles to complainants without issuing notice or hearing the petitioner, who claimed possession of the vehicles as security for loans. The High Court held that the order was passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice and set it aside, remanding the matter for fresh hearing after giving opportunity to all parties. (Paras 3-7) B) Money Lending - Competent Authority - Ex Parte Order - Section 17(1) Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014 - The Competent Authority acted on complaints by respondent Nos. 7 to 10 alleging that vehicles registered in their names were handed over to the petitioner as security for loans. Without any notice to the petitioner, the Authority directed return of vehicles. The High Court found this unsustainable as the petitioner was not heard, violating natural justice. (Paras 4-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order passed by the Competent Authority under Section 17(1) of the Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014, directing return of vehicles to the complainants, is sustainable when passed without hearing the petitioner who was in possession of the vehicles.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 25 March 2022 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the Competent Authority for fresh consideration after giving an opportunity of hearing to all parties. The petitioner is directed to produce the vehicles before the Competent Authority on the date of hearing and not to alienate or encumber them until further orders. The petition is disposed of.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- right to be heard
- Section 17(1) Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act
- 2014
- quashing of ex parte order
