which one would produce a better image quality?
They're pretty comparable looking at the MTFs, though because they're zooms it's really not easy to compare since they're completely different focal lengths at each end of the chart- they may each be "better" at different focal lengths, depending on what criteria you use for "better" (sharpness, contrast, distortion, color rendition, bokeh, aberrations.) 3mm on the wide end is a fair bit of difference, 20mm on the long end is as well- especially on a crop-factor body.
The bodies also have different base ISOs for the sensor, so a lot depends on what you like to shoot, and under what conditions. The Nikon's ISO 200 base will give it about a stop's advantage when shooting at 200 and up, but a stop's disadvantage at 100. That extra stop means an extra shutter speed- which may make a difference with fast-moving targets, but will make no difference at all off a tripod or with static subjects at 1/focal-length. The Canon has slightly better resolution, so at base ISO it should perform slightly better- though you'll likely not really see the difference in most images, and you'll lose that difference as you move off of the base sensor ISO.
Even more importantly, you're really choosing between to *systems* and looking at the specs of the current camera bodies is less useful than it appears, as it's likely to be a 2-3 year choice that won't have as much impact as the next body's features and IQ- and since those aren't out yet, it's difficult to say which manufacturer will deliver what IQ.
In summary, the differences are small and highly dependent on what you're shooting, under what conditions you're shooting under with what settings you're using. If you took 20 different prints shot under different conditions with each combination you'd probably not be able to categorize them by camera/lens.
Paul