1. By means of this reference, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, has recommended the setting aside of the order dated 10-10-2002 formulated by 3rd Additional Munsiff, Jammu, whereby the motor vehicle No. 5781-JK02G (Tipper) has been released on the Supardnama of J&K Bank Ltd. Branch Tootan Di Khui, Jammu. It is also recommended that instead of placing on the Supardnama of the Bank, the said vehicle be placed on the temporary Supardnama of registered owner-Mohd. Shafi, resident of Bye-Pass Sidhra, Jammu with further condition contained in the order of reference on the ground that the Bank will not be in a position to use the vehicle nor it can put it to auction as the same has been seized in criminal proceedings and resultantly the utility of the vehicle would diminish everyday, thereby making the recovery of the loan by the Bank virtually impracticable.

2. It appears that in a criminal case, registered on the complaint of Mohd. Shafi, who claims to be the registered owner of the vehicle No. 5781-JK02G (Tipper) which is stated to have been fraudulently taken away by Ghulam Mohd. Shah from the custody of the registered owner and stood recovered & parked in Police Station, Nagrota, an application came to be initiated for the temporary custody of the said vehicle during the pendency of the trial. It was stated before 3rd Additional Munsiff, Jammu, that the vehicle is exposed to heat while lying in the compound of the Police Station and the automobile is likely to be lost to all in such situations in case the vehicle is not put to use.

3. Similar application for the release of the custody of the vehicle was also made by Ghulam Mohd. Shah in alleging that the said vehicle has been purchased by him and he paid the entire amount to the registered owner and also cleared the liability of the Bank. Another application was moved by the J&K Bank Ltd., Branch Tootan Di Khui, Jammu, claiming the release of the vehicle on the Supardnama as the truck in question was financed by the Bank in the name of Mohd. Shafi on the execution of requisite documents in their favour, for having loan not yet liquidated till date.

4. The learned Magistrate, however, after hearing the parties directed the vehicle No. 5781-JK02G to be released on the Supardnama of J&K Bank Ltd, Branch Tootan Di Khui, Jammu, on the condition not to alienate, transfer for deal with it in any manner without prior permission of the Court and produce the same as and when required.

5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, two revisions came to be preferred, one by Ghulam Mohd. Shah and the other by Mohd. Shafi, admittedly the registered owner of the motor vehicle No. 5781-JK02G, before the Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, who after hearing the parties recommended the quashing of the order dated 10-10-2002 passed by 3rd Additional Munsiff, Jammu, pertaining to the release of the vehicle in question of Supardnama, in this reference.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and meticulously perused the record of both the Courts below in the matter. It is not in dispute that Mohd. Shafi is the registered owner of the motor vehicle No. 5781-JK02G and the vehicle stands in his name. Therefore, a heavy burden lies on a person, who claims that such a vehicle has been sold to him or that he has a superior title. In the absence of convincing, reliable and clear evidence, a motor vehicle should not be ordinarily given to a person, who is neither a registered owner, nor has valid permit for plying the vehicle, nor has been duly and validly entrusted with it, even if the police took possession of the same from him. This is because only the registered owner can ply the same and if it is not used on the road no purpose would be served in giving the interim/temporary custody of the motor vehicle to such a person.

7. It has been held in catena of cases by the various High Courts including the Apex Court that until transfer of ownership is entered in the certificate of registration, person in who

Click Here to Read the rest of this document