Allowed

Shabbir Roshan Ali Khan v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC12 Jan 2006WP/46/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of writ petitions challenging the seizure of vehicles older than eight years. Ordering deposit of Rs. 20,000 in the Chief Minister's Relief Fund and filing an undertaking not to ply within Greater Mumbai limits, directing release for one journey to take vehicles outside.

What did the court decide?

Deposit of Rs. 20,000 in Chief Minister's Relief Fund, filing undertaking not to ply in Greater Mumbai, and release of vehicles for one journey outside municipal limits.

Shabbir Roshan Ali Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra and… — Motor Accident Claims | Bombay HC (2006)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO. 46 OF 2006

¶3

Shabbir Roshan Ali Khan ... .... Petitioner V/s State of Maharashtra & Ors.... ..... Respondents.

¶4

With

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 47 OF 2006 Avdesh Shukala.... .... Petitioner. V/s The State of Maharashtra & Ors... ... Respondents.

¶6

With

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO. 52 OF 2006 Sbhabbir Roshan Ali Khan.... .... Petitioner. V/s The State of Maharashtra & Ors... ... Respondents. Mr.B.G.Tangsali, Adv. for the petitioners.

¶8

Mr.R.D.Rane, Govt. Pleader for Respondents.

¶9

CORAM: V.G. PALSHIKAR, Ag.C.J AND SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. 12.1.2006. PC:

¶10

¶11

By this petition, the petitioner has impugned the action of the respondent- R.T.O of impounding and seizing the vehicle belonging to the petitioner as it violated the requirement of R.T.O. Which do not permit plying of vehicle which are more than eight years old of the manufacture. In similar circumstances this Court was moved in Writ Petition No.6086 of 2005 taking into consideration peculiar circumstances in which the vehicles are prohibited from being plying within limits of Greater Bombay, directed the disposal of petition in following terms:

¶12

“2. In these circumstances, this petition is disposed of by direction the petitioner to deposit with the Chief Minister's Relief Fund an amount of Rs.20,000/- . The petitioner shall deposit this amount with the 2^nd Respondent who shall, in turn, forward the amount to the Chief Minister's Relief Fund. The petitioner shall file an undertaking before the second respondent that the vehicle shall not, hereafter, be plied within the municipal limits of Greater Mumbai. The second respondent shall subject to compliance with the aforesaid conditions release the vehicle only for one journey within the municipal limits of Greater Mumbai so as to enable the petitioner to take the vehicle outside the municipal limits.”

¶13

In our opinion, this petition can also be disposed of by accepting the request of the petitioner for depositing in Chief Minister's Fund an amount of Rs.20,000/- and on such deposit the petitioner will also file an undertaking before the respondent No.2 that the vehicle shall not ply within municipal limits of Greater Bombay. Respondent No.2 is directed to seek compliance of the order and release the vehicle only for one way journey out of municipal limits of Greater Bombay. The petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶14

Shabbir Roshan Ali Khan v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shabbir Roshan Ali Khan v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prakash Krishnarao Deshmukh Vs Deepak Pujari and Anr.

Rajendra Vasudeo Marathe and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Madhukar Dharmaji Mohape and Ors. Vs Aruna Arun Wadekar and Ors.

Dilip Vrajlal Shah Vs State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

M/S. Heritage Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Madhusudan Y. Joshi Vs Joint Divisional Registrar of Co-Op. Soc. and Ors.