Shambhu Prasad Prajapati vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Others
2009 Latest Caselaw 4787 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


+     W.P.(C) 12514/2009

%                            Date of decision : 23rd November, 2009.

      SHAMBHU PRASAD PRAJAPATI                ..... Petitioner
                   Through Mr. A. Asthania, advocate.

                    versus


      GOVT. OF NCT DELHI AND ORS.            ..... Respondents
                     Through Ms.Ruchi Sindhwani, advocate for
                     respondents 1,2, 4 & 5.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA


                                 ORDER

C.M. No.14448/2009

Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

C.M. No.14447/2009

Parties have been heard and the writ petition is taken up for

hearing today itself.

Application is allowed.

W.P.(C) No. 12514/2009

Petitioner claims that he has purchased a TSR vehicle no.DL-

1RD-3342 from one Mr. Bhola Auto Deal. The petitioner further

contends that the said TSR vehicle was challaned and the petitioner

was prosecuted and had to pay fine imposed by the court. The

aforesaid TSR vehicle stands registered and permit stands issued in

the name of one, Mr.Shobh Nath who is not impleaded as a party. It is

WPC No.12514/2009 Page 1 the contention of the petitioner that said Mr.Shobh Nath is not

traceable as per the police report and he is also facing proceedings

under Section 82/83 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The

petitioner has, however, filed on record Form nos. 29 and 30 allegedly

executed by Mr.Shobh Nath in favour of Mr.Megh Raj Arora. The

petitioner claims that the said transfer by Mr.Shobh Nath in favour of

Mr.Megh Raj Arora is fraudulent and contrary to law as the vehicle was

already transferred to the petitioner before the said transfer. Mr. Megh

Raj Arora is not impleaded as a party.

2. Who is the owner of the said TSR vehicle should be decided by

a civil court. These are disputed questions of fact. The petitioner has

stated in the Writ Petition that the respondent-registration authorities

in view of the complaint made by the petitioner have not carried out

any transfer and registration in favour of Mr. Megh Raj Arora in their

records.

3. The petitioner has made grievance in respect of another TSR

vehicle, DL-1RJ-1827. It is, however, admitted that the petitioner has

sold the said vehicle to a third person. As the petitioner has admittedly

already sold the vehicle to a third person, the petitioner is not entitled

to any relief in the present Writ Petition in respect of the said TSR

vehicle.

4. Writ Petition is accordingly not entertained with liberty to the

petitioner to file a civil suit to establish his title in respect of the TSR

vehicle no.DL-1RD-3342. It will be also open to the petitioner to file an

WPC No.12514/2009 Page 2 interim application.

5. Respondent-registration authorities will examine whether there is

a general tendency to sell and dispose of TSR vehicles without proper

and full documentation as alleged by the petitioner and if required,

remedial steps will be taken.

Writ Petition is disposed of. The date already fixed is cancelled.

DASTI.

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

NOVEMBER 23, 2009.

      P




WPC No.12514/2009                                                    Page 3