E-Paper
Jeev Milkha Singh didn’t sell vehicle as per MV Act: Court
The court of chief judicial magistrate Aman Inder Singh observed that international golfer Chiranjeev Milkha Singh, better known as Jeev Milkha Singhhas failed to comply with Section 48 of the MV Act, which mandates that the seller must obtain a no-objection certificate when the transferee resides outside the state.
After international golfer Chiranjeev Milkha Singh, better known as Jeev Milkha Singh, approached the court, seeking registration of an FIR against a car dealer and purchaser after he received notices pertaining to 63 unpaid challans for a car he sold in 2014, the court has now ruled that Singh didn’t follow the Motor Vehicle Act during sale
The court of chief judicial magistrate Aman Inder Singh observed that the complainant has failed to comply with Section 48 of the MV Act, which mandates that the seller must obtain a no-objection certificate when the transferee resides outside the state.
The application and request of Singh for sending the matter for registration of a case under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure was also declined. The court observed that ingredients of Sections 420 (cheating), 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) are also not made out.
The case will now come up for hearing on December 23, 2022.
The golfer is the registered owner of a Mercedes Benz car, which he had sold in June 2014 to Nitin Jain, director, Vibes Healthcare Limited, Hauz Khas, through a car dealer Tejinder Singh of Rally Motors for ₹35 lakh. Jeev Milkha, who is the son of legendary sprinter Milkha Singh, moved court after he received notices from a Delhi court regarding challan violations amounting to ₹83,000, which have been accruing since 2015. Jeev Milkha’s counsel, Terminder Singh, said all documents pertaining to sale and purchase of the vehicle were executed and Nitin Jain’s duly sworn affidavit had been handed over to applicant on June 10, 2014, but even after purchasing the vehicle and handing over its possession, the accused did not transfer the registration of the vehicle.
