Sudhir Kapoor & Ors. vs State (Nct Of Delhi) & Ors.
2019 Latest Caselaw 592 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                           Date of Order: January 30, 2019

+     CRL.M.C. 4451/2017
      SUDHIR KAPOOR & ORS                                   ..... Petitioners
                           Through:       Mr.Anupam Dwivedi, Advocate.

                           Versus

      STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS                     ..... Respondents

                           Through:       Mr.Vikam S. Panwar, Mr.Vikas
                                          Walia, Mr.Naveen Kumar and
                                          Mr.Akhilesh Singh Rawat, Advs.
                                          for R2.

+     CRL.M.C. 477/2018
      MONTO JAIN                                     ..... Petitioner
                           Through:       Mr.Rajesh Khanna, Advocate.
                           Versus

      STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.                   ..... Respondents

                           Through:       Mr.Vikam S. Panwar, Mr.Vikas
                                          Walia, Mr.Naveen Kumar and
                                          Mr.Akhilesh     Singh     Rawat,
                                          Advocates for Respondent No. 2

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
                         ORDER

(ORAL) In the above captioned petitions, the challenge is to the concurrent findings returned by the courts below regarding release of five vehicles in

question on superdari to the respondent-financer of the vehicles, as the case put-forth is that 'No Objection Certificate' (NOC) of vehicles in question are forged and these vehicles have been sold by respondents- Monika, Krishan Raj and Santosh Kumar Rai to petitioners herein.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, these petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

Learned counsel for the petitioners assails the revisional order of 13th September, 2017 on the ground that Supreme Court in Rajendra Prasad vs. State of Bihar & Anr. (2001) 10 SCC 88 has clarified that the vehicles on superdari are required to be released to the ostensible name holder in the registration certificate and the vehicles are not to be kept idle.

Counsel for respondent-financer submits that reliance placed upon Supreme Court's decision of Rajendra Prasad (supra) is of no avail, as the registration of the vehicles in question has been transferred in the name of petitioners on the basis of forged NOC. So, it is submitted that these petitions deserve to be dismissed.

Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned order, status report, material on record and the decision cited, I find that Supreme Court's decision in Rajendra Prasad (supra) is of no assistance to the case of petitioners, as in the instant case, NOC's, on the basis of which vehicle in question have been transferred in the name of petitioners, have been found to be forged, as per FSL report of July, 2018. In such a situation, the courts below have aptly held that the vehicles in question are to be

released on superdari to the respondent-financer. Finding no palpable error in the impugned orders, both these petitions are dismissed while not expressing any opinion on merits of the case.

The above captioned two petitions are accordingly disposed of.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE JANUARY 30, 2019 neelam