HARBHAJAN KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BRIEFLY , the facts are that there is a police challan pending arisig out of F.I.R. No. 68 of 7.7.90 of Police-Station Sirhind for offences under Sections 279/337 of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of Shri P.S. Virk, Judicial Magistrate I Class, Fatehgarh Sahib. The offending vehicle was Bus No. PAB-6395. This bus originally belonged to M/s. Gill and Sahota Transport Company but it appears that on 19.2.1991 there was an agreement for sale of this bus for a consideration of Rs. 2,07,500/- in favour of Mahesh Lal. At any rate, the original superdar withdrew the superdari and Mahesh Lal has been acting as a superdar for the purpose of production of this vehicle in the trial Court. At one stage, Mahesh Lal failed to produce this bus in the trial Court and the superdari was cancelled. Considering him to be a purchaser as well during this period, the Judicial Magistrate ordered that the bus in question be released on superdari to aforesaid Mahesh Lal on 4.4.1991. It appears that on a subsequent date this Mahesh Lal was unable to produce the bus in question in the Court concerned on one occasion and his superdari was cancelled. The application of Shrimati Harbhajan Kaur a partner of M/s Gill and Sahota Transport Company, Jalandhar, for release of the vehicle on superdari has been dismissed by the Judicial Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib on 28.5.1991. Aggrieved against it the present revision has been attempted.

(2.) PRIOR to the impugned order of 28.5.1991 the vehicle was in possession and on superdari of Mahesh Lal. On behalf of the petitioner attention has been invited to Parveen Kumar v. State and Anr. Crimes 1990 (1) 670. But at the same time, the present one is not a case as if nothing happened after execution of the agreement of the sale of the vehicle. Here, not only a considerable part of the price of the vehicle has been paid by Mahesh Lal this vehicle also remained in his possession. The learned Counsel for the respondent has referred to Mohan Lal v. The State of Haryana and Anr. 1988 (1) C.L.R. 614, where also the factum of payment of price by the purchaser carried weight vis-a-vis the registered ownership so far as the delivery of vehicle was concerned. The conclusion is that the present petition moved by Harbhajan Kaur, claiming herself as one of the partner of M/s. Gill and Sahota Transport Company, Jalandhar, is hereby dismissed. The trial Court shall, deliver the bus in question to Mahesh Lal son of Hans Raj on such superdari as it deems proper. The partner shall appear in the trial Court at Fatehgarh Sahib on 15.7.1991.