JUDGMENT 1. - Brief facts of the case are that truck No. DEL 4667 met with an accident/at Shahpura and was seized by the Station House Officer, Police Station, Shahpura. One Gyani Ram Sarayana on behalf of M/S. Associated Road Carriers Ltd., submitted an application before the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Shahpura for delivering the custody of the above truck.Learned Magistrate by order dated August 12, 1987, dismissed the application. In that order learned Magistrate observed that the registration of the above truck ;as lying seized by the Traffic Police, Gandhinagar. From the perusal of the case diary it appeared that the truck in question was insured by M/S. Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd., it was further observed by the learned Magistrate that the Mukhtiarnama produced by Gyani Ram was executed by M/S. Associated Road Carriers Ltd., but the truck was registered in the name of M/S. Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd., A contention was raised before the learned Magistrate by learned counsel for Gyani Ram that Associate Road Carriers Ltd. and M/S. Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd., were both sister concerns but the learned Magistrate was not satisfied and dismissed the application submitted by Gyani Ram. 2. Thereafter, another application was submitted by one Balraj for giving custody of the truck on supurdgi. Snri Balraj submitted the original registration certificate of the truck and a general power of attorney executed in his favour by the Director of M/S. ARC India (Pr.) Ltd. In the general power of attorney it was clearly mentioned that M/S. Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd , has been changed to M/S. ARC India (Pr.) Ltd., in accordance with Section 23 (i) of the Indian Companies Act and certificate of incorporation in the name of M/S. ARC India (Pr.) Ltd., has been issued by the Registrar of Companies. The learned Magistrate dismissed this application also by order dated August 22, 1987. The learned Magistrate dismissed this application also by order dated August 22, 1987. The reason given in this order is that Gyani Ram Sarayana in the application filed by him had submitted that he was employed as Manager in M/S. Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd., and the above fact was certified by one of the Directors Shri M.K. Goyal on the letter-head of M/S. Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd. Learned Magistrate thus held that when M/S. Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd., and M/S. Road Carriers Ltd., were said to be sister concern, it was contradictory now to state that M/S. Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd., has been converted into M/S. ARC India (Pr.) Ltd. 3. I have heard Mr M.R. Singhvi for the petitioner. Nobody appears on behalf of the State inspite of notice served on them. 4. The applicant Balraj had already filed the permission of Registrar of Comparies changing the name of M/S. Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd., to ARC India (Pr.) Ltd. The certificate of incorporation consequent on the change of name was also issued by the Registrar of Companies. Bengal on 29th day of November. 1985. The truck No. DEL 4667 was admittedly registered in the name of M/s Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd., whose changed name is now ARC (Pr.) Ltd. Shri Balraj, who is the manager of M/S. Associated Road Carriers Ltd., Branch Jaipur has now been authorised by a power of attorney given by the Director of ARC India (Pr.) Ltd., and on that basis he had moved the application for the release of the above vehicle on behalf of M/S. ARC India (Pr.) Ltd. If in the earlier application filed by Gyani Ram it was mentioned that Associated Road Carriers Ltd. and M/S Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd., were sister concern, I fail to understand as to why ARC India (Pr ) Ltd., is not entitled to receive the delivery of the vehicle. Admittedly, M/S. ARC India (Pr.) Ltd., is the changed name of M/S. Roadways (India) Pvt. Ltd., in whose name the truck in question is registered. Balraj has been authorised by a general power of attorney to take the delivery of the truck on behalf of M/S. ARC India (Pr.) Ltd.,. Nobody also is claiming any right of taking delivery of the above truck and in these circumstances learned Magistrate was not justified in dismissing the application filed by Balraj. Balraj has been authorised by a general power of attorney to take the delivery of the truck on behalf of M/S. ARC India (Pr.) Ltd.,. Nobody also is claiming any right of taking delivery of the above truck and in these circumstances learned Magistrate was not justified in dismissing the application filed by Balraj. The order dated August 22, 1987 passed by Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Shahpura, is set aside and it is directed that the truck DEL 4467 may be delivered to Balraj after taking a supurdginama for the production of i the above truck in the Court as and when directed The amount of supurdginama shall be determined by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Shahpura. *******