Rajendra Kumar Vs. State of Rajasthan and anr. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- motor vehicles act, 1988 [c.a. no. 59/1988]sections 163-a & 166; [r.m. lodha, shiv kumar sharma & ashok parihar, jj] award passed by tribunal under section 163-a nature of held, the award passed by tribunal under section 163-a of act under structured formula is a final award and once that award has been passed, no further award under chapter xii of m.v. act could be passed by the tribunal. the provisions contained in sections 163-a and 166 of act provide for two different modes but the two modes cannot simultaneously be invoked by the claimants. the claimant must opt/elect to go either for a proceeding under section 163-a or under section 166 of the m.v. act but not under both. the award under section 163-a is final and cannot be described as interim and no proceeding for..........the direction to deliver the jeep bearing no. hr-22/8010 on superdgi to respondent namely kartik finance company.2. the brief facts giving rise to the instant petition are that the jeep bearing no. hr-22/8010 was seized in connection with an f.i.r. case no. 524/2002 police station hanumangarh junction. the said case has been registered against the driver of the jeep for offence under sections 279 and 337, i.p.c. the petitioner being the registered owner of the vehicle claimed the delivery of vehicle. the respondent-finance company also submitted an application for the delivery of vehicle. the learned chief judicial magistrate considering the petitioner, the registered owner of the vehicle, directed to deliver the vehicle to him on superdgi on furnishing a surety bond in the sum of rs......

Judgment:
ORDER

N.N. Mathur, J.

1. The instant petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C. has been filed seeking direction to quash the order of the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh dated 12-12-2002 whereby he has set aside the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hanumangarh and the direction to deliver the jeep bearing No. HR-22/8010 on superdgi to respondent namely Kartik Finance Company.

2. The brief facts giving rise to the instant petition are that the jeep bearing No. HR-22/8010 was seized in connection with an F.I.R. Case No. 524/2002 Police Station Hanumangarh Junction. The said case has been registered against the driver of the jeep for offence under Sections 279 and 337, I.P.C. The petitioner being the registered owner of the vehicle claimed the delivery of vehicle. The respondent-finance company also submitted an application for the delivery of vehicle. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate considering the petitioner, the registered owner of the vehicle, directed to deliver the vehicle to him on superdgi on furnishing a surety bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-. Accordingly, the jeep was delivered to him. However, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has reversed the order and directed the vehicle to be delivered to the finance company.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. It is not in dispute that vehicle has been seized in connection with an accident case. The controversy in the instant case is not with respect to the payment of instalments to the finance company. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate considered the fact that the petitioner is a registered owner of the vehicle directed for temporary custody of the vehicle to him. It is held by various decisions of this Court and the Apex Court that a registered owner of the vehicle is normally entitled to the custody of the vehicle. It is held by the Apex Court in Manoj v. Shriram Tpt. Finance Co. Ltd., reported in 2002 Criminal 377 that in case if instalment is due against the owner, it is always open for the finance company to approach to the Civil Court. I am of the view that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has committed error in reversing the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate which was more in consonance with the settled position of law.

4. Consequently, the misc. petition is allowed. The judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1. Haumangarh dated 12-12-2002 is set aside. The order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hanumangarh dated 27-11-2002 with respect to the delivery of jeep bearing No. HR-22/8010 is restored.