SARDAR SINGH Vs. NURAHMED
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Click here to view full judgement.
V.K Mehrotra, J. -
(1.) This petition under Section 401 read with Section 482, Cr.P.C. arises out of proceedings under Section 457; Cr. P.C. The trial Magistrate passed an order on December 19, 1990 in favour of the two applicants. That order was reversed by the learned AddI. Sessions Judge, Mandi, on January 8,1991.
(2.) One Mohammad Amin is the registered owner of a motor vehicle (truck No: HID 4966). Under a hire purchase agreement, the truck was purchased by obtaining loan from the Canera Bank, Mandi.
(3.) On February 12, 1990 an agreement for the sale of the vehicle aforesaid was entered into between Mohammad Amin through his special power of attorney holder Nur Ahmed and Sardara Singh and Prem Lal Kapoor, the two applicants in the present petition. Under that agreement the vehicle was to be sold to these two persons for a total sum of Rs. 1,72,000/- out of which Rs. 37,000/- was paid to the seller by way of advance. The remaining amount of Rs. 1,35,000/- was to be paid by the present applicants to the Canera Bank, Mandi, in equal monthly instalments already fixed by the starting from March 1990. Clause 2 of this agreement says that: the ownership of this vehicle will remain in the name of the first party (Mohammad Amin) along with route permit and other documents till the full and final payment of the Bank is cleared by the second party (Sardara Singh and Prem Lal Kapoor) and thereafter the second party can get the vehicle transferred in their name for which a separate power is given for the transfer of the vehicle after obtaining NOC from the BankT Under clause 5, the right of resumption of possession of the vehicle is given to the first party in the event of the second party making default in payment to the bank continuously for three months.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.