IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2011 / 17TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 7824 of 2011(C) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- SUNDARAM FINANCE LTD 1ST FLOOR,THE MORARCH, P.T.USHA ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682011 REP.BY THEIR BRANCH MANAGER, M.D.MOHANAN BY ADVS. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA-PIN-686661 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.M.MANOJ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 7824/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 09/10/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT. P2: COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.36 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT DATED 07/10/2009. P3: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28/10/2009 OR THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE,S COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA IN C.M.P. NO.1708/2009 IN C.C. NO.543/2008. P4: COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.S1/44607/09EM DATED 07/12/2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.S1/44607/09/EM DATED 28/09/2010 SEND BY THE RESPONDENT. P6: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 04/11/2010 SEND BY M/S. MUTHOOT LEASING AND FINANCE LTD. P7: COPY OF FORM NO.35 ISSUED BY M/S.MUTHOOT LEASING AND FINANCE LTD. P8: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 12/10/2010 SENT BY REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. P8(a):COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT FORWARDED BY THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA DATED 12/10/2010. P9: COPY LETTER NO.S1/29715/2008/EKM DATED 21/02/2011 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 7824 OF 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ext.P9 letter sent by the Regional Transport Officer, Muvattupuzha to the petitioner informing the petitioner that the petitioner's application for the issue of a fresh registration certificate can be disposed of only after the documents seized by the Police and produced in the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Muvattupuzha in connection with Crime No.906 of 2008 are returned, is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. One Vinu Cheriyan purchased a motor car bearing registration No.KL-17F-954 after availing financial assistance from Muthoot Leasing and Finance Ltd. He fabricated a No Objection Certificate to make it appear that he has repaid the loan availed for the purchase of the car and got the endorsement regarding hypothecation cancelled by the Regional Transport Officer. He thereafter availed a loan of Rs.2,25,000/- from the petitioner agreeing to repay it in 48 monthly installments. The loan was secured by a hypothecation of the motor car and the W.P.(C).No. 7824 OF 2011 2 hypothecation was entered in the certificate of registration of the motor car. The registered owner remitted the first repayment instalment. Shortly thereafter, he fabricated a document to make it appear that the hypothecation arrangement with the petitioner was terminated upon repayment of the loan. When the said document was produced before the Regional Transport Officer, Muvattupuzha, he entertained a doubt regarding its genuineness. He thereupon lodged a complaint with the Police and Crime No.906 of 2008 of Muvattupuzha Police Station was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 471 and 473 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The motor car was also seized by the Police in connection with the said crime. The petitioner thereupon moved the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Muvattupuzha and obtained release of the motor car. Still later the petitioner filed CMP.No.1708 of 2009 for an order permitting the petitioner to dispose of the motor car. By Ext.P3 order passed on 28.08.2009 the court below allowed the application on the following terms: “7. Considering the circumstances it is only just and proper to allow the prayer in the petition. In the result, petitioner is permitted to dispose of W.P.(C).No. 7824 OF 2011 3 the car with Reg.No.KL-17F-954 after taking photograph showing the Reg.No. chasis number etc. for identification and produce the photograph with negatives before Court. Petitioner shall furnish the sale records of the vehicle before Court and shall execute an interimity bond equivalent to the sale proceeds of the vehicle.” 3. The petitioner thereafter submitted Ext.P2 application under section 51 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the issue of a fresh registration certificate in the name of the petitioner. On that application, notice was issued to the Branch Manager of the petitioner, the Branch Manager of Muthoot Leasing & Finance Ltd, Tripunithura and Sri.Vinu Cheriyan. It appears in the meanwhile the registered owner of the car had repaid the loan availed by him from Muthoot Leasing and Finance Ltd and therefore they informed the Regional Transport Officer that they have no objection to a fresh registration certificate being issued after cancelling the endorsement regarding hypothecation in their favour in the registration certificate of the car. The registered owner did not appear in spite of receipt of notice from the Regional Transport Officer. However, by Ext.P9 letter dated 21.01.2011, the Regional Transport Officer informed the petitioner that the petitioner's application for the issue of a fresh W.P.(C).No. 7824 OF 2011 4 registration certificate can be disposed of only after the records are received back from the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Muvattupuzha. Hence this writ petition. 4. I heard Sri.Philip.T.Varghese, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.M.Manoj, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. Sub section (5) of section 51 of the Motor Vehicles Act empowers the Registering Authority to issue a fresh certificate of registration in the name of the financier on the financier re-possessing the vehicle owing to the default of the registered owner and the registered owner refuses to deliver the certificate of registration to the financier or has absconded. The only requirement of law is that the Registering Authority should give the registered owner of the vehicle an opportunity to make such representation as he wishes to make in the matter. The said provision also empowers the Registering Authority to cancel the certificate of registration notwithstanding the fact that certificate of registration is not produced before it and issue a fresh certificate of registration in the name of the person with whom the registered owner has entered into a hire purchase agreement. It W.P.(C).No. 7824 OF 2011 5 is evident from section 51 of the Act that even in cases where the original of the registration certificate issued in the name of the registered owner is not forth coming and the registered owner absconds, the Registering Authority can cancel the registration certificate initially issued in the name of the registered owner and issue a fresh certificate of registration in the name of the financier or lessor as the case may be. In the instant case, the court which is trying the case has by Ext.P3 order permitted the petitioner to sell the car. The court had also earlier handed over custody of the car to the petitioner. These orders thus establish that the petitioner being financier of the car is entitled to its custody and to dispose of the same. In my opinion, in the light of the fact that original of the registration certificate is in the custody of the court, the court having permitted the petitioner to sell the car, there is no reason why the Registering Authority should await the disposal of the case for cancelling the registration certificate and issuing a fresh registration certificate in the name of the petitioner. The apprehension expressed by the learned Government Pleader that some one may get possession of the original registration certificate, after the case W.P.(C).No. 7824 OF 2011 6 is disposed of and may make use of it is not a relevant ground to ask the financier to wait till the case is disposed of for the issue of a fresh registration certificate. Such a situation can arise even in a case where the registered owner has absconded and has not surrendered the registration certificate. The law stipulates that notwithstanding the fact that registered owner has absconded and has not made available the original of the registration certificate, the registering authority can cancel the certificate of registration and issue a fresh registration certificate in the name of the financier or the lessor as the case may be. In such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that Ext.P9 cannot be sustained. I accordingly allow the writ petition, quash Ext.P9 and direct the respondent to issue a fresh registration certificate in respect of the vehicle bearing registration No.KL 17F 954 to the petitioner, expeditiously and in any event within one week from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of the judgment before him, if notice in terms of section 51(5) of the Act has already been served on the registered owner. If, on the other hand, the notice has not been served on the registered W.P.(C).No. 7824 OF 2011 7 owner (Sri.Vinu Cheriyan), the respondent shall issue notice to him by registered post and pass orders on the application within one month from the date of service of the notice on the registered owner. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE dmb