Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1157 (AP)

Sanapathi Jyothi v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2022-10-31

TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO

body2022
ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief : "To issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of respondents 3 to 5 in demanding the petitioner that they intend to seize the Motor Car – TATA Indica Vista of Dew White Colour bearing No.AP37CA 5595 absolutely belonging to the petitioner though the same was released after the fine amount was paid by the petitioner vide Proceedings –AP237/Dec, 2019/101960, dt.26.5.2020 issued by Asst. Motor Vehicle Inspector on behalf of 5th Respondent, pursuant to the Show-Cause Notice of the 4th Respondent dt.10-01-2020, followed by the Legal Notice dt.10-02-2020 of the petitioner and followed by the 4th Respondent vide Lr.No: No.6004/A3/2019, Dt.02-03-2020 to the 3rd Respondent, is nothing but arbitrary, illegal, unlawful and unreasonable and in violation of the Principles of Natural Justice and Fundamental Rights of the Petitioner under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, by consequently, directing the respondents 3 to 5 not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner over her Motor Car – TATA Indica Vista of Dew White Colour bearing No.AP 37CA 5595, and pass such other orders." 2. Sri Oggula Ravi Kumar, who is arrayed as 9th respondent herein, made a complaint in Spandana, in turn, it was re-directed to the 4th respondent. His complaint is that his Car bearing No.AP 37CA 5595 was transferred in favour of one Sri Channamsetti Punnayya Naidu-8th respondent without his knowledge and the said transfer has been done in fraudulent way and clandestinely by using his Aadhar number and therefore, he requested the authorities to take action. It is further stated that he has purchased the said vehicle on finance from the 6th respondent herein. In pursuance of the letter/complaint made by the 9th respondent, the 4th respondent herein has issued a notice to the petitioner herein and to the respondents 6 to 8. The petitioner herein has sent a legal notice dated 10.02.2020 in reply to the notice of the 4th respondent inter alia the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. In pursuance of the letter/complaint made by the 9th respondent, the 4th respondent herein has issued a notice to the petitioner herein and to the respondents 6 to 8. The petitioner herein has sent a legal notice dated 10.02.2020 in reply to the notice of the 4th respondent inter alia the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition. The case of the writ petitioner is that he purchased the said car from 8th respondent, who is the highest bidder and he knocked the bid conducted by the 6th respondent, whereby the 8th respondent, in turn, sold the said car to the 7th respondent and from the 7th respondent, the writ petitioner has purchased the car and after payment of the penalty and other amounts to the 7th respondent, he owned the car and he is bona fide purchaser of the car. Aggrieved by the Lr.No.6004/A3/2019 dated 02.03.2020 issued by the 4th respondent, the petitioner herein has challenged the proceedings before this Hon’ble Court. This Court, vide order date 15.07.2020, directed the respondents 3 to 5 not to seize the petitioner’s car bearing No.AP 37CA 5595 and also directed the petitioner not to transfer or create any third party interest over the said vehicle and also directed the petitioner herein to issue notices to the unofficial respondents. 3. Sri V.R. Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel, filed vakalat for respondent No.6 and Sri D.V. Madhusudhan Rao, learned counsel, has appeared for respondent No.9. 4. Learned counsel for the 9th respondent filed counter and would submit that the 9th respondent purchased the vehicle by availing loan from the 6th respondent and as the 9th respondent failed to pay few installments, the 6th respondent has whisked/taken away the car and they have invoked the Arbitration Clause as per the agreement clause entered by the 9th respondent under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the 9th respondent has not contested in the arbitration proceedings. The Arbitration Proceeding Case No.TMFL/ARB/May, LOT-97(2017)/151, dated 30.12.2017, eventually, ended in ex parte. The Arbitration Proceeding Case No.TMFL/ARB/May, LOT-97(2017)/151, dated 30.12.2017, eventually, ended in ex parte. The further case of the 9th respondent is that without availing of the remedies as contemplated under Section 36 of the Arbitration Act before the competent Civil Court to get the car in accordance with law, has conducted an auction by violating the provisions of the Arbitration Act, and they have clandestinely sold the vehicle by using the Aadhar number of the 9th respondent herein, therefore, he made a complaint before Spandana. Basing upon the complaint given by the 3rd respondent, the 4th respondent has initiated the proceedings and he submits that the writ petitioner is not entitled for any relief and prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition. 5. It is the contention of Sri V.R. Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the 6th respondent, that as the 9th respondent, who is the principal borrower, has not paid the installments, by initiating Arbitration Proceedings, the 6th respondent has obtained the car and they conducted auction and in the said auction, the 8th respondent is the highest bidder and therefore, the car was transferred to the 8th respondent and the 9th respondent appeared before the official respondent-authorities and he signed all the papers under requisite forms under the Motor Vehicles Act, which are relevant for the transfer of the car and he has no locus to contest in the Writ Petition filed by the very same writ petitioner, as he is not the aggrieved, his remedy is elsewhere and supplicated to allow the Writ Petition. 6. On analyzing the above contentions, whether the 9th respondent can agitate before this Court by way of a counterclaim to direct the respondent-authorities to initiate action against the respondents 6 to 8. The learned counsel for 9th respondent would submit that under sub-clause (5) of Section 51 of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Act, when a complaint given to the authorities invariably, they have to conduct enquiry and pass appropriate orders and basing upon the complaint, the official respondents have issued notices to respondents 6 to 8 and the car was transferred clandestinely and there was a collusion in between the 6th respondent and official respondents. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition and solicited to direct the authorities to conduct enquiry in accordance with law as per the above indicated provision, which is extracted below : "51. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition and solicited to direct the authorities to conduct enquiry in accordance with law as per the above indicated provision, which is extracted below : "51. Special provisions regarding motor vehicle subject to hire-purchase agreement, etc.— (5) Where the person whose name has been specified in the certificate of registration as the person with whom the registered owner has entered into the said agreement, satisfies the registering authority that he has taken possession of the vehicle 3[from the registered owner] owing to the default of the registered owner under the provisions of the said agreement and that the registered owner refuses to deliver the certificate of registration or has absconded, such authority may, after giving the registered owner an opportunity to make such representation as he may wish to make (by sending to him a notice by registered post acknowledgment due at his address entered in the certificate of registration) and notwithstanding that the certificate of registration is not produced before it, cancel the certificate and issue a fresh certificate of registration in the name of the person with whom the registered owner has entered into the said agreement:1[from the registered owner] owing to the default of the registered owner under the provisions of the said agreement and that the registered owner refuses to deliver the certificate of registration or has absconded, such authority may, after giving the registered owner an opportunity to make such representation as he may wish to make (by sending to him a notice by registered post acknowledgment due at his address entered in the certificate of registration) and notwithstanding that the certificate of registration is not produced before it, cancel the certificate and issue a fresh certificate of registration in the name of the person with whom the registered owner has entered into the said agreement: Provided that a fresh certificate of registration shall not be issued in respect of a motor vehicle, unless such person pays the prescribed fee: Provided further that a fresh certificate of registration issued in respect of a motor vehicle, other than a transport vehicle, shall be valid only for the remaining period for which the certificate cancelled under this subsection would have been in force." 7. The official respondents, who filed counter, would contend that the 9th respondent herein has made a complaint before Spandana and the same was forwarded to the 4th respondent and, on receiving the said complaint, they have issued notices to respondent Nos.6 to 9 and writ petitioner herein, which is impugned before this Court and the writ petitioner has obtained interim order and accordingly, they have stalled the proceedings and they would follow the directions issued by this Court and they prayed this Court to permit them to conduct enquiry as per the above indicated provision. 8. It is the case of the 9th respondent herein that they have clandestinely transferred the vehicle in the name of the third party by using his Aadhar number and it is the contention of the petitioner as well as the 6th respondent herein that the 9th respondent has physically appeared before the authorities and he has signed all the requisite forms for transfer of the vehicle. 9. In view of the same, the respondent-authorities are directed to adjudicate whether the 9th respondent has signed all the papers for transfer of the vehicle as per the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Pending adjudication, the respondent-authorities are hereby directed to issue fresh show cause notices to respondents 6 and 9 and the petitioner herein and conduct enquiry to the extent, as indicated above and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Till such time, the official respondents and the 9th respondent are precluded from claiming any rights on the Car bearing No.AP 37CA 5595. 10. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs of the Writ Petition. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.