A sessions court in Ahmedabad has directed that custody of a luxury Mercedes-Benz SUV be handed over to its registered owner, casting doubt on a property broker's assertion that he had purchased the vehicle in the name of his friend's wife and used it for seven years.
Court Questions Broker's Explanation
While hearing a revision application in the dispute over a Mercedes-Benz GLS 350D, the court remarked: "What appears to be doubtful is that, Why would a person purchase a luxury brand car in the name somebody's wife?" The case involves a Prahladnagar-based property broker who claimed he bought the SUV in 2019 using his friend's wife's name because his friend faced documentation issues and could not purchase the vehicle in his own name. The broker stated that he regularly paid the loan instalments and remained in possession of the vehicle, despite it being registered under the woman's name.
Background of the Dispute
The matter came to light after Anandnagar police registered an FIR in December 2024 concerning the alleged theft of the vehicle from the broker's residence. During the investigation, police discovered that the broker's friend had allegedly taken the SUV using a duplicate key, leading to his booking for theft. The vehicle was later seized by police after a service station manager reportedly brought it to the broker's residence.
Subsequently, both the broker and the friend's wife approached a magistrate's court seeking interim custody of the vehicle. The magistrate initially rejected the woman's plea and granted custody to the broker, citing his possession of the vehicle and payment of instalments.
Woman Challenges Order
The woman challenged this order before a sessions court, arguing that she was the lawful owner of the SUV. The sessions court questioned the broker's explanation for purchasing the luxury vehicle in the woman's name and noted that the service station manager's statement would be relevant in deciding the custody dispute. The matter was then remanded to the judicial magistrate for fresh consideration after hearing the manager.
After reconsideration, the magistrate again ruled in favour of the broker, observing that he had financed the vehicle, even though it was registered in the woman's name.
Sessions Court Ruling
The woman once again challenged the order before the sessions court. Additional sessions judge Namrata Unadkat noted that the vehicle loan was sanctioned in the woman's name and that the loan closure certificate had also been issued in her favour. The court further observed that the broker had made no effort since 2019 to transfer the vehicle into his own name.
In its order, the court stated: "The court is required to ascertain as to who is prima facie lawfully entitled to have the custody of the vehicle and not merely who happened to be physically in possession thereof at the time of seizure. Mere physical possession at the time of seizure cannot supersede lawful ownership, particularly when the revisionist/applicant has established prima facie ownership by producing the registration as well as above discussed documents."
The sessions court thereafter directed that custody of the vehicle be handed over to the registered owner.
Further Legal Proceedings
However, the dispute has now reached the Gujarat high court, which has stayed the transfer of custody until August 31 and is scheduled to hear the matter further on that date.
