- (1.) THE petitioner in this WP under art.226 dated January 5, 2012 is seeking the following principal relief: "a) A writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents their agents and subordinates not to take forcible possession of the said vehicle of the petitioner without due process of law."
(2.) THE petitioner borrowed money from the fourth respondent, Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited. This private finance company and the petitioner are involved in private law disputes. Hence a mandamus cannot be issued asking the finance company not to take forcible possession of the vehicle in question.
(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submits that since the finance company has threatened to take forcible possession of the vehicle on the grounds that the petitioner is in default on the loan, she has approached the police, and that since the police have refused to entertain the complaint, she is entitled to a mandamus. In my opinion, in the name of police inaction the petitioner is actually seeking adjudication of her private disputes with the finance company. If the finance company has committed any offence, then, instead of approaching the High Court under art.226 alleging police inaction, she ought to have approached the Criminal Court that could consider the question of passing an order either under s.156(3) or s.190 CrPC.;