According to the Allahabad High Court, the “Registered Owner Refuses To Surrender RC Or Absconds” clause of the Motor Vehicle Act is not a requirement to exercise power.
Title: Shahrukh Saleem. vs. State of UP and 2 others
Decided on: 4th July, 2023.
WRIT – A No. – 10418 of 2023
CORAM: Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J. Hon’ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.
Introduction.
According to the Allahabad High Court, the ability to exercise the right under Section 51(5) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 to cancel and issue a new certificate of registration is not contingent upon the registered owner’s reluctance to relinquish the registration certificate or his disappearance.
Analysis.
The Court decided that when the registered owner fails to repay the debt, the financier is entitled to a new certificate of registration in his name. This is the Act’s and the Rules’ intended structure, as shown in Section 51(5) when read in conjunction with Rules 61(2) and 61(3).
The registered owner must relinquish the RC, according to the court, in order for a new RC to be issued in the financer’s name. The registered owner is given notice via Form-37 in the event that he refuses to turn over the RC or flees. The non-obstante clause gives the RTO the authority to issue fresh RC to the financier even if the registered owner has withheld the original RC or has fled.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Varada Hawaldar