Disposed

Syamala v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Mar 2014Crl.MC/1413/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, mother of deceased accused, sought interim custody of vehicle registration certificate from Magistrate to transfer ownership. Court directed Magistrate to hand over RC to Police Station officer to deliver to RTO for endorsement rather than to petitioner directly.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Margistrate to hand over RC to Police SHO to deliver to RTO for endorsement of ownership in petitioner's favour.

Syamala Vs State of Kerala — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/21ST PHALGUNA, 1935

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 1413 of 2014 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 588/2012 OF NADAKKAVU POLICE STATION , KOZHIKODE DISTRICT CMP.NO.7103/2013 IN CC.NO.902/2013 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-IV, KOZHIKODE

¶7

-----------------------------

¶8

PETITIONER :

¶9

SYAMALA, W/O.JANARDHANAN, AGED 69 YEARS, POOLAKKAL PARAMBA HOUSE, KARUVISSERY P.O, KOZHIKODE.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.ANUMOD B.NAIR

¶11

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT :

¶12

1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 031.

¶13

2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE- 673 020.

¶14

R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SAREENA GEORGE.P.

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

sts

¶17

Crl.MC.No. 1413 of 2014 ()

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:

¶20

ANNEX.1 - CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IN CMP NO.3784 OF 2013 DATED 27-7-2013 ANNEX.2TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE DATED 28-11-2013 ANNEX.3 - CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IN CMP NO.7103 OF 2013 DATED 2-1-2014

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

Crl.M.C. No.1413 of 2014

¶27

Dated this the 12^th day of March, 2014

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

This Criminal miscellaneous case is filed by the petitioner challenging the order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate-IV, Kozhikode, in Crl.M.P.No.7103/2013 in C.C.No.902/2013 pending before that court, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called the 'Code').

¶30

It is alleged in the petition that, the petitioner is the mother of the 2^nd accused in C.C.No.902/2013 pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-IV, Kozhikode. The case was registered by Nadakkavu Police Station as Crime No.588/2012, alleging offences under Sections 465, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, on the basis of the complaint filed by the 2^nd respondent, against the petitioner's son and

¶31

¶32

Crl.M.C. No.1413 of 2014

¶33

another person. The allegation was that, the 2^nd accused had made some manipulation in the original registration certificate, stating that speed governor has been installed in the vehicle and endorsement was made to that effect in the registration certificate, without installing the speed governor and the owner has compounded the offence by remitting 5,000/- for not installing speed governor in the₹ vehicle as per law. The 2^nd accused died on 11.06.2013. After the death of the 2^nd accused, the petitioner, who is mother of the 2^nd accused succeeded the right to the vehicle. She became the present owner of the stage carriage being the sole legal heir of the 2^nd accused. She filed an application for transfer of permit and that was considered by the Regional Transport Authority, Kozhikode, in the meeting held on 28.11.2013 and allowed the transfer of permit in respect of the vehicle in favour of the petitioner. This has to be endorsed in the original registration certificate. For that purpose, she filed this application for interim custody of the registration

¶34

Crl.M.C. No.1413 of 2014

¶35

¶36

certificate, only for the purpose of effecting the transfer of the ownership of the vehicle in favour of the petitioner, but that petition was dismissed by the learned magistrate by the impugned order. So, the petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this court, seeking the following relief:

¶37

“For these and other grounds to be submitted at the time of hearing, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call for the records in C.M.P. No.7103 of 2013 in C.C.No.902 of 2013 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-IV, Kozhikode and allow the interim custody of R.C. Book or even direct the second respondent to take steps to effect the transfer of name in R.C. Book and allow this Criminal Miscellaneous Case.”

¶38

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the

¶39

learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

¶40

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner does not want the registration certificate permanently, but only wanted for the purpose of making endorsement regarding the transfer of ownership in her favour from the name of the original registered owner, as legal heir. For that purpose, the registration certificate of the vehicle is required. He has also in the alternate

¶41

Crl.M.C. No.1413 of 2014

¶42

¶43

submitted that, if the court is not inclined to hand over the registration certificate to the petitioner for that purpose, he only wanted that to be handed over to the 2^nd respondent herein for making the endorsement through the Station House Officer, Nadakkavu Police Station to get it endorsed and return the document to the court itself, within a time frame.

¶44

The learned Public Prosecutor has no objection for the same. Public Prosecutor has objection only in returning the document to the petitioner permanently, as it is a material document and evidence required to be kept for the purpose of disposal of the case.

¶45

It is seen from the order of the learned magistrate that earlier the same petitioner has filed an application as Crl.M.P.No.3784/2013 for this purpose and that was dismissed by the court by Annexure-A1 order. Thereafter, the same petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.7103/2013 for the same purpose through another lawyer and that was also dismissed by the court below by the impugned order,

¶46

¶47

Crl.M.C. No.1413 of 2014

¶48

on the ground that the earlier application filed by the petitioner for similar purpose was dismissed. So it cannot be said that, the order passed by the court below is illegal in the circumstances of the case. But considering the fact that, the petitioner has become the owner of the vehicle and the permit has been transferred in her name by the authorities as legal heir after the death of the original registered owner namely her son, the second accused in the case, without making necessary endorsement regarding the same in the original registration certificate, the petitioner cannot ply the vehicle. So considering the circumstances, instead of returning the registration certificate to the petitioner, this court feels that some alternate arrangements can be made through the Station House Officer, Nadakkavu Police Station for this purpose. So the petition is disposed of as follows:

¶49

The learned magistrate is directed to make

¶50

arrangements to hand over the disputed registration certificate to the Station House

¶51

¶52

Crl.M.C. No.1413 of 2014

¶53

Officer, Nadakkavu Police Station, for the purpose of taking the registration certificate to the office of the 2^nd respondent herein, namely, Regional Transport Officer, Civil Station, Kozhikode, for the purpose of making endorsement regarding change of ownership in favour of the petitioner in the registration certificate and after doing the same, produce it before the court, within a time frame, so that, the petitioner can ply the vehicle on the basis of the permit transferred in her name.

¶54

With the above direction and observation, the petition is disposed of. Office is directed to communicate this order to the court below at the earliest.

¶55

Sd/K. Ramakrishnan, Judge

¶56

// True Copy //

¶57

P.A. to Judge

¶58

Syamala v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syamala v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kallikunnu Jishi Vs the State of Kerala

Gireesh Kumar T. Vs State of Kerala

Eashy v J @ Dasan Vs State of Kerala

Mohammadali Vs State of Kerala

Santhamma Abraham Vs P.P.Singh

Faisal Vs State of Kerala