Back
2024 Supreme(All) 1428
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
NAND PRABHA SHUKLA, J.
Km. Gunjan (Minor) – Petitioner
Versus
Ram Ratan - Respondent
Matters Under Article 227 No. 9641 Of 2023
Decided On : 12-11-2024
For the Petitioner: Anup Kumar Singh, Rajesh Kumar Gautam.
For the Respondent: Ajay Dubey.
IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed the minor's rightful ownership of a vehicle, ruling that a forged sale deed does not transfer ownership, emphasizing the importance of legal heirship.
Headnote:
(A) Constitution of India - Article 227 - Writ petition to set aside order of Additional Session Judge regarding vehicle ownership - Petitioner, a minor, is the sole legal heir of the deceased registered owner of the vehicle - Allegations of forged sale deed by respondent - Temporary authorization granted to petitioner by R.T.O. - Court finds the sale deed invalid and reaffirms petitioner's rightful ownership. (Paras 2, 10, 16, 18, 20)
(B) Legal heirship and ownership - The court emphasizes that the minor petitioner, as the sole legal heir, is entitled to the vehicle despite claims of transfer based on a forged document. (Paras 16, 19)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a minor, seeks to reclaim a vehicle purchased by her deceased father, which was wrongfully claimed by a former driver through a forged sale deed. (Paras 4-5)
Findings of Court:
The court set aside the order of the Additional Session Judge and directed the immediate return of the vehicle to the minor petitioner. (Paras 19-20)
Issues: The main issue was the validity of the alleged sale deed and the rightful ownership of the vehicle. (Paras 10, 18)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the alleged sale deed was forged and reaffirmed the minor's legal right to the vehicle as the sole heir. (Paras 18-19)
Result: Writ Petition disposed of in favor of the petitioner.
JUDGMENT :
(Nand Prabha Shukla, J.)
Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Shambhu Mani Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ajay Dubey, learned counsel for the respondent no.3, Sri Nand Lal, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer to set-aside the order dated 25.08.2023 passed by learned Additional Session Judge, Court No. 29, Agra passed in Criminal Revision No. 179 of 2023 (Ram Ratan vs. State of U.P. and another) and also direct the learned Trial Court to release the aforesaid vehicle in favour of the petitioner.
3. The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner Km. Gunjan (minor) aged about 8 years through her legal, i.e., her maternal grandfather Sri Kishan Pal Singh.
4. The matter in brief is that the father of the petitioner namely Late Manvendra Singh purchased a Bolero Vehicle on 8.4.2019 which was registered through Certificate of Registration dated 1.8.2019 before the Transport Regional Officer, Agra as U.P.80 FC 3477. Unfortunately, the father of the minor petitioner died on 03.05.2019. Subsequently, her mother also died on 17.11.2019. In the meantime, the respondent no. 3 Ram Ratan who served as a driver of her father wanted to grab the vehicle and got a forged
5. Notary Sale Deed dated 25.03.2019 prepared in his favour and moved an application dated 23.9.2019 for transfer of ownership. After having knowledge about the same, the maternal grandfather of the petitioner endeavoured to get back the vehicle from respondent no. 3 Ram Ratan but was denied.
6. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the maternal grandfather (Kishan Pal Singh) moved an application before the Regional Transport Officer, Agra to transfer the aforesaid vehicle in favour of the petitioner, the sole legal heir of her deceased parents. A report dated 27.12.2021 was sought from Lekhpal wherein the petitioner Km. Gunjan (minor) was shown to be the sole legal heir of the deceased Manvendra who was the owner of the vehicle. Accordingly, the Regional Transport Officer, Agra, gave temporary authorization on 5.7.2023 of the said vehicle to the petitioner under the guardianship of her maternal grandfather for a certain period.
7. In the meanwhile, on 31.05.2022, the Barhan Police seized the said vehicle U.P. 80 FC 3477 under Section 207 of Motor Vehicles Act and was challaned vide Challan Order No. 91012220531184219 in the name of Ram Ratan as at the time of seizure, the vehicle was in the custody of respondent no. 3 Ram Ratan. An application was moved by the petitioner through her guardian Kishan Pal Singh for the release of the aforesaid vehicle as she was the registered owner. The said release application was however rejected on 17.6.2022.
8. Aggrieved by the said order, a Revision No. 397 of 2022 was filed before the District Judge, Agra wherein Ram Ratan was directed to be impleaded as a necessary party and the said revision was partly allowed directing the Court concerned to dispose of the matter after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Both the parties appeared before the Trial Court and on the basis of records available the order dated 9.2.2023 was passed.
9. During the pendency of the criminal revision, the R.T.O. Agra granted temporary authorization of the vehicle to the minor petitioner Gunjan. Ram Ratan raised an objection that the vehicle has been transferred on the basis of incorrect facts and real facts were suppressed before the Transport Officer, Agra. Accordingly, the said transfer of the vehicle in favour of the petitioner was black listed.
10. The main submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order dated 25.08.2023 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Court No. 29, Agra is illegal and is not sustainable as the petitioner being the sole legal heir of the deceased Manvendra Singh, was the rightful owner
