“Arabi” accuses his friend of seizing his car after he left the country permanently

A person of Arab nationality paid the price for trusting his friend, who deposited his car with him and asked him to sell it, and returned the value of its mortgage to the bank, after writing a power of attorney for him to do so. Then he left the country for a final return to his country, but he discovered when he returned again to the Emirates that his friend had kept With the car, he did not pay the remaining amount of the loan, and he committed many violations with it, so he was forced to pay all these amounts in order to reach a bank settlement and be able to resume his work.

In detail, an Arab man filed a lawsuit demanding that another man return a Mercedes car in the same condition that he left it with, without any damage or damage, or to pay its fixed value to him, according to the agreement to sell the car when he delivered it to him for a value of 118 thousand and 500 dirhams, in addition to the value of traffic fines. accumulated on it.

He said in a statement of his claim that due to family circumstances, he was forced to leave the country for his country with the intention of staying there permanently, and he left his car with the defendant and issued a power of attorney for him to sell the car and pay the remaining amount of its bank mortgage.

He added that the defendant pledged to him to initiate procedures for selling the car, paying the value of the loan, and releasing its mortgage, in the presence of a witness of the nationality of an Asian country.

The plaintiff indicated that he obtained a new job opportunity in the country, and when he returned, he was surprised that the defendant did not sell the car or pay the value of the loan, but rather seized it, used it for a long period and accumulated large financial fines due to the traffic violations recorded in the plaintiff’s traffic file.

He continued that he was forced to pay the value of the loan and the accumulated interest due to non-compliance with the payment in order to avoid being prosecuted by the bank, noting that he contacted the defendant and asked him to return the car, but he delayed him for a period of time, then hung up his phone, and communication between them was cut off.

In support of his claim, he presented a folder of documents in which a copy of the car’s ownership was folded, a copy of the entry and exit movement report, including the date of his departure from the country and his return to it, a copy of an agency specializing in selling the vehicle in the name of the defendant, and a copy of the fines imposed on it as a result of traffic violations, in addition to a copy of the receipt. He states that he has paid the value of the loan along with a clearance issued by the bank in his name, and a copy of a text message issued by the defendant via the “Facebook” application, showing his phone number and car details. The subject of the lawsuit, and a letter from the bank stating that the person appointed by it to pay the value of the car loan did not contact the bank.

For his part, the defendant submitted a responsive memorandum in which he requested that the lawsuit be dismissed for lack of validity and proof. The court heard the testimony of the prosecution witness who stated that the plaintiff was his manager at work, and that he received the disputed vehicle from him, to deliver it to the defendant, after the first informed him that he would sell it to the second. But he does not know the person who committed the violations, nor does he know whether the car remained with the defendant after he handed it over to him or not.

After examining the case and listening to the witness, the court concluded that the plaintiff did not prove that the car was owned by the defendant and that he kept it, nor did he prove that he was the one who committed the violations. This does not discredit the issuance of a special power of attorney for him to sell the car, as that is not suitable as a basis for his answer to His requests, because the agency did not prove this, and then the Dubai Civil Court ruled to reject the case.

[email protected]