SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 331

D.P.MOHAPATRA, K.T.THOMAS
Rajendra Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


(1) LEAVE granted.

(2) WE are not deciding the question as to the title of the vehicle in dispute nor the correctness of the rival versions regarding the transactions relating to the vehicle. We do not want the vehicle to remain in the compound of the Police Station exposed to heat and cold because the automobile is likely to be lost to all in such situation. To avert this situation, we are inclined to entrust it temporarily to the appellant who is the ostensible name-holder in the registration certificate. The custody of the vehicle with the appellant will be on behalf of the Court and this arrangement is only till the stage when the Court passes the order regarding disposal of the property on conclusion of the trial. We direct the trial court to release the vehicle to the appellant on the following conditions: (a) The appellant will produce the original registration certificate (as issued by the Transport Office. If it is a "duplicate" he must obtain a certificate from the R.T.O. that duplicate was issued from the office). (b) The appellant shall execute a bond in a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs with two solvent sureties that he will produce the vehicle back in Court wheneve

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top