Can I file a case against my friend for deceitfully taking a loan on my name?

Can I file a case against my friend for deceitfully taking a loan on my name? Sir, my friend bought a car in my name and also took a loan in my name. He is unable to pay the EMI and is not returning the car. I need suggestions on how to get the car back. He has also given my car to someone else for money, but he is not informing me about it.

Can I file a case against my friend for deceitfully taking a loan on my name? Sir, my friend bought a car in my name and also took a loan in my name. He is unable to pay the EMI and is not returning the car. I need suggestions on how to get the car back. He has also given my car to someone else for money, but he is not informing me about it.

You have completed all the legal and other formalities in purchasing and financing of the car. At this stage you cannot say that your friend has purchased in your name. 

As per the financial documents, you are the real borrower. It does not matter that your friend has not been paying the EMI. You should lodge a first information report against your friend because he has deceived you by making false promises to pay EMI.

Your friend had no intention to pay the EMI at the time of getting finance from the bank. He has cheated you and by making default he has committed the offence of cheating. You should surrender the car to the bank and seek cancellation of the hypothecation.

But in this process you should be ready to pay the balance amount remaining after the adjustment of sale proceeds of your car.  

Tags:

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

Husband is demanding DNA test to check the paternity of our son in divorce case

The law does not permit a husband to compel his wife or child to undergo a DNA test merely on the basis of suspicion. In Gautam Kundu v. State of West Bengal (1993) 3 SCC 418, the Supreme Court held that a blood or DNA test cannot be directed as a matter of course. Before seeking such a direction, the husband must establish a strong prima facie case by proving that he had no access to his wife during the period when the child could have been conceived.

क्या चेक बाउंस का केस मियाद समाप्त होने के बाद भी दाखिल हो सकता है

Negotiable Instruments Act के अंतर्गत, वैधानिक अवधि समाप्त होने के बाद भी चेक बाउंस का मामला दायर किया जा सकता है। यदि शिकायतकर्ता देरी का उचित कारण प्रस्तुत करता है, तो न्यायालय विलंब को क्षमा कर शिकायत स्वीकार कर सकता है। नोटिस के बाद निर्धारित समय में भुगतान न होने पर कार्यवाही प्रारंभ की जा सकती है।

Cancellation of bail when accused tempering with witness

Seeking the cancellation of bail is possible when an accused person tampers with witnesses or influences a trial. This guide explains legal grounds for such actions, focusing on mandatory procedures under Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act and post-bail threats. Learn how victims can approach higher courts to ensure a fair trial and protect their rights.

Evidence of interested witness is admissible in criminal proceedings

In criminal law, the testimony of a related witness cannot be discarded solely due to their relationship with the victim. This legal overview clarifies the distinction between related and interested witnesses, citing key Supreme Court rulings. It explains how natural witnesses provide admissible evidence that reliably forms the basis for a conviction, even without independent corroboration.

SDM cannot attach property under section 146 crpc when civil suit is pending

A Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot legally attach property under Section 146 of the CrPC if a civil suit regarding the same property is already pending. This guide explains why such orders lack jurisdiction and outlines the proper legal remedy, including filing a petition under Section 482 CrPC to the High Court based on established Supreme Court precedents.