Sections 6 516A and 1 561 a superintendent asserted that the applicant in the dispute had purchased another applicant, his wife, from the defendant through an oral agreement, but the aforesaid respondent had applied for the petitioner. Denied the claim that the vehicle was registered. Police seized the respondents and vehicle from the possession of the respondents The applicants could not present a contract / transfer proceeding in connection with the vehicle allegedly executed by the plaintiff in favor of the first applicant. Below the respondents, the courts gave the appropriate answer in favor of the respondents. Can prove your ownership of the vehicle in dispute in the appropriate forum
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
