# Sold your car on an open letter. Is it still yours? > On paper, it may still be yours. The Supreme Court has held that an open transfer letter "is not a valid document of title" and does not transfer ownership of a vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Ordinance 1965. In law the owner is the person in whose name the vehicle is registered (PLD 2020 SC 299, para 12). - Topic: Property and inheritance - Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan - Citation: PLD 2020 SC 299 - The myth: "Once you sign an open letter, the car is the buyer's: its challans and cases are his problem." Verdict: Wrong. - Watch: https://failegal.site/media/open-letter-car-transfer-pakistan-pld-2020-sc-299 (video https://failegal.site/media/open-letter-car-transfer-pakistan-pld-2020-sc-299/reel.mp4, 1:13) - Published by FAI Legal on 2026-10-30 In that case a man held only an open letter when police seized the car in a drugs case in Lahore in August 2015. He had it registered in his name five months later. The Court said that was too late: on the day of the case he was not the owner, and he did not get the car back (paras 12, 13 and 17). ## Key points - An open transfer letter is not a valid document of title, and it does not transfer ownership of a vehicle (PLD 2020 SC 299, para 12). - The owner is the person in whose name the vehicle is registered (Motor Vehicles Ordinance 1965, section 2(24)); a transferee must be duly registered (para 12). - The buyer must report the transfer to the registering authority within thirty days (section 32(1), the Punjab text in FAI). - Until the transfer is registered, the seller is still the owner on paper, and the buyer cannot prove ownership, for example to get the car back from the police (paras 12 and 13). - A transfer registered after the car was seized as case property was "without lawful authority" (para 14). ## Sold your car on an open letter: is it still yours? The short answer On paper, yes. In PLD 2020 SC 299, decided on 13 March 2020, the Supreme Court held: "An open transfer letter is not a valid document of title", and it does not transfer ownership of a vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Ordinance 1965 (para 12). The Ordinance defines the owner as the person in whose name the vehicle is registered, and the Court added: "Transferee must be duly registered under MVO" (para 12). So a signed open letter is not a finished sale in the eyes of the law. Until the transfer is registered, the registration still names the seller, and the buyer cannot prove that the car is his. ## Lahore, 2015: what happened On 20 August 2015 police in Lahore stopped a Toyota Corolla on a tip-off, arrested its two passengers and said they found narcotics and weapons in the car and on the men. A case was registered at Police Station Mustafabad under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 and the Arms Ordinance 1965, and the car was seized the same day (para 1). On 20 November 2015 a man who was not an accused asked the trial court to give him the car on superdari (custody during the trial), saying he was its owner. He held only an open transfer letter. The trial court gave him the car on 18 December 2015; the Lahore High Court set that order aside on 30 October 2017 because he could not prove ownership with an open transfer letter (paras 2 and 3). ## What the Supreme Court decided in March 2020 A bench of Manzoor Ahmad Malik, Sardar Tariq Masood and Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, JJ heard the petition on 13 March 2020. The order, by Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, J, upheld the High Court, refused leave and dismissed the petition (para 17). The Court first set out who may ask for a seized vehicle in a narcotics case: an applicant who shows that he is its lawful owner and is not the accused or an associate or relative of the accused (para 11). The man failed the first condition. The Ordinance's owner is the registered person, and "An open transfer letter is not a valid document of title" (para 12). ## Too late: registered five months after the case The car was registered in the man's name on 21 January 2016. The Court said: "This was too late as at the time of alleged commission of the offence, the seizure of the Vehicle and the registration of the criminal case on 20.08.2015 the petitioner was not the owner of the Vehicle" (para 12). And: "An applicant must be the owner of the vehicle prior to the commission of the offence" (para 12). He had also said nothing about how the car came to be with the accused, which the Court called fatal to his request (para 13). The late registration was itself wrong. Once a car is case property, its legal title is frozen until the trial ends, so the Court held that the "transfer of ownership of the Vehicle by the Motor Registration Authority on 21.01.2016 was not permissible and is, therefore, without lawful authority" (para 14). It sent the matter to the registering authority for action (para 15). ## How to transfer car ownership in Pakistan: within 30 days Section 32(1) of the Provincial Motor Vehicles Ordinance 1965 (the Punjab text in FAI's Statute Search) says the transferee shall, within thirty days of the transfer of ownership, report the transfer to the registering authority where he ordinarily resides, with the documents and the prescribed fee, so that the registration is changed to the new owner. Each province has its own version of the Ordinance and its own office procedure, so ask your province's Excise and Taxation office what it needs. As a seller, do not stop at a signed open letter: make sure the transfer is registered in the buyer's name. As a buyer, the car is yours in law only when it is registered in your name. The Court also held that the vehicle must be physically checked before a transfer is registered (section 27 applies to transfers under section 32; para 15), and asked the provincial governments to consider this: "The transferor/ transferee at the time of registration of the vehicle may be required to obtain a No Objection Certificate from the Police or to submit an Affidavit to the effect that the vehicle is not involved in any criminal case" (para 16). ## Buying a used car on an open letter: the risk If a car you bought on an open letter is caught in a criminal case before it is registered in your name, the law does not treat you as its owner. In this case the buyer could not get custody of the car during the trial (paras 12, 13 and 17). Check the registration papers against the seller before you pay, and register the transfer at once. Keep a copy of every paper you sign or receive. ## For law students and lawyers Under the proviso to section 74 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997, a conveyance used in a narcotics offence is not given on custody to the accused, an associate or relative, or any private individual until the case ends, except as the Act allows; under the proviso to section 32(2), it is liable to confiscation only if it is proved that its owner knew of the offence (paras 6 to 10). Reading the two sections together, the Court held that a vehicle may be released on superdari during the trial to an applicant who shows he is its lawful owner, is not connected with the accused, and explains how he lost it (para 11, relying on Allah Ditta v. The State, 2010 SCMR 1181, and Abdul Salam v. The State, 2003 SCMR 246). The Balochistan High Court applied the ruling in Shakirullah v. The State, 2023 MLD 319: "Mere possession of original return file does not transfer ownership of a vehicle in terms of ibid Ordinance", and a purchased vehicle should be transferred within thirty days under section 32 (para 7). ## The case at a glance - **Facts:** Police in Lahore seized a car in a narcotics and arms case on 20 August 2015. A man who held only an open transfer letter asked for it on superdari on 20 November 2015; it was registered in his name on 21 January 2016. - **The question:** Was he the car's owner, so that it could be given to him during the trial; and could a seized car be registered in a third person's name while the case was pending? - **What the Court held:** No to both. An open transfer letter is not a valid document of title; an applicant must be the owner before the offence; the registration after the seizure was without lawful authority. Leave refused and petition dismissed (13 March 2020). - **Why:** Section 2(24) of the Motor Vehicles Ordinance makes the registered person the owner and a transferee must be duly registered (para 12); the release test under sections 32 and 74 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act (para 11); a freeze on title while a vehicle is case property (para 14); physical verification under section 27 applies to transfers (para 15). - **Limits:** The case was about giving a seized car to a claimant during a criminal trial. It did not decide a private dispute between a seller and a buyer over the price or the sale. ## The law it relies on - **Provincial Motor Vehicles Ordinance, 1965 (Punjab text), Section 2(24):** "owner" means the person in whose name the motor vehicle is registered, and includes a transferee of the motor vehicle from such persons (and others listed, such as a hire-purchase holder in possession). - **Provincial Motor Vehicles Ordinance, 1965 (Punjab text), Section 32:** Transfer of ownership: the transferee reports the transfer to the registering authority within thirty days, with the documents and the prescribed fee, and the registration is changed. - **Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, Sections 32(2) and 74:** A vehicle used in a narcotics offence is liable to confiscation only if its owner knew of the offence (proviso to s.32(2)), and is not given on custody to the accused, an associate or relative, or any private individual until the case ends (proviso to s.74), as quoted in PLD 2020 SC 299, paras 6 and 10. ## What this does not mean - It did not decide a private dispute between a seller and a buyer over the price or the sale. It decided who is the owner under the Motor Vehicles Ordinance when a seized car is claimed during a criminal trial. - It does not make the registered owner guilty of what someone else does with the car. Under the proviso to section 32(2) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, a vehicle is liable to confiscation only if it is proved that its owner knew of the offence (paras 9 and 11). - It does not say the buyer committed any offence. He was not an accused; the question was only ownership. - It does not set the fee or the office procedure for a transfer. Those come from each province's rules and its Excise and Taxation office. ## Questions people ask ### Is an open letter valid for a car transfer in Pakistan? No. The Supreme Court held that an open transfer letter is not a valid document of title and does not transfer ownership of a vehicle under the Motor Vehicles Ordinance 1965 (PLD 2020 SC 299, para 12). Register the transfer. ### How to transfer car ownership in Pakistan? Report the transfer to the registering authority, your province's Excise and Taxation office, within thirty days, with the documents and the prescribed fee, so the registration is changed to the new owner (section 32(1), Provincial Motor Vehicles Ordinance 1965). Ask the office what it needs. ### How many days do I have to transfer a car after buying it? Thirty days from the transfer of ownership, under section 32(1) of the Provincial Motor Vehicles Ordinance 1965 (the Punjab text in FAI's Statute Search). ### Who is the owner of a car in law? The person in whose name it is registered. The definition also includes a transferee, and the Supreme Court said a transferee must be duly registered (section 2(24); PLD 2020 SC 299, para 12). ### Open letter par gaari bechi, ab kya karein? Qanoon mein owner wohi hai jis ke naam gaari registered hai. Open letter se milkiyat muntaqil nahin hoti (PLD 2020 SC 299). Excise office mein transfer register karwayein; qanoon tees din kehta hai. ### What did the Supreme Court say on vehicle ownership transfer? In PLD 2020 SC 299 (13 March 2020): an open transfer letter is not a valid document of title; an applicant must be the owner before the offence; registering a seized car in a third person's name was without lawful authority. You can read it on FAI Legal's Judgment Search. ## Sources - Amjad Ali Khan v. The State and others, PLD 2020 SC 299, Supreme Court of Pakistan, 13 March 2020, paras 1 to 17. An open transfer letter is not a valid document of title and does not transfer ownership; the owner is the registered person; an applicant must be the owner before the offence; registering a seized car to a third person was without lawful authority. (verified against full text) - Shakirullah v. The State and another, 2023 MLD 319, High Court of Balochistan, 8 September 2021, paras 5 to 7. A return file does not transfer ownership; a purchased vehicle should be transferred within thirty days under section 32; relies on PLD 2020 SC 299. (verified against full text) - Provincial Motor Vehicles Ordinance, 1965 (Punjab text), Sections 2(24) and 32 (text checked in FAI Statute Search, 30 October 2026) ## What the reel says Sold your car on an open letter? Is it still yours? Car transfer in Pakistan: what does an open letter really do? People say: once the letter is signed, the car is the buyer's. Wrong. Lahore, 2015: police seized a car in a drugs and weapons case. A man came to court with an open letter: it's my car. In March 2020 the Supreme Court said "An open transfer letter is not a valid document of title", and the owner is the person in whose name the car is registered. He had it registered five months later: too late, and he did not get the car back (PLD 2020 SC 299). What to do: 1. Selling or buying, don't stop at the open letter. 2. Register the transfer within 30 days (Motor Vehicles Ordinance, section 32). 3. Until then, on paper, the car is still the old owner's. --- Educational legal information, not legal advice. Every case turns on its own facts. Speak to a lawyer about your own matter. Last checked: 30 October 2026. Review status: Pending advocate review. English: https://failegal.site/media/open-letter-car-transfer-pakistan-pld-2020-sc-299 ยท Urdu: https://failegal.site/media/ur/open-letter-car-transfer-pakistan-pld-2020-sc-299 FAI Media is part of FAI Legal (https://failegal.site), research on Pakistani statutes and judgments. Free to watch and read.