Partly allowed

Prince Joseph v. Joint Rto, Mattancherry.

Kerala HC11 Jan 2007WP(C)/1182/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a direction to test a vehicle and dispose of an exemption appeal. The court denied the testing direction due to default in clearing tax arrears, though it conditionally directed the 3rd respondent to consider the pending appeal if arrears are cleared within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for vehicle testing dismissed due to tax default; 3rd respondent directed to dispose pending appeal if tax arrears cleared within three weeks.

Prince Joseph Vs Joint Rto, Mattancherry. — Kerala HC (2007) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2007 / 21ST PAUSHA 1928

¶5

WP(C).No. 1182 of 2007(N)

¶6

¶7

PETITIONER: ------------

¶8

PRINCE JOSEPH, EDEZHATHU HOUSE, KUMBALANGHI SOUTH P.O.,COCHIN-7.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.M.TRIPTEN

¶10

SRI.M.SIVAPRASAD

¶11

RESPONDENTS: -------------

¶12

JOINT R.T.O., J.R.T. OFFICE, MATTANCHERRY, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, R.T.OFFICE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORT, D.T.C. OFFICE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI SOJAN JAMES

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

P.R.RAMAN,J.

¶18

W.P.(C).NO.1182 OF 2007

¶19

Dated this the 11th day of January, 2007

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The prayer made in this writ petition is

¶22

for a direction commanding respondents 1 and 2

¶23

to test the vehicle KL-7/AB 2705 after

¶24

receiving the current tax and also for a

¶25

direction to the 3rd respondent to dispose of

¶26

of Ext.P5 appeal relating to the claim for

¶27

exemption rejected by the original authority.

¶28

Admittedly, the petitioner has not

¶29

cleared the arrears of tax. As per the

¶30

endorsement in Ext.P1, the petitioner was

¶31

given instalment facility for payment of tax

¶32

arrears for the period from 1/7/2005 to

¶33

31/12/2005 as per Government Order dated 30/11/2005 and the last of such instalment fall due on 15/3/2006. It is admitted by the

¶34

-2-

¶35

W.P.(C).NO.1182/2007

¶36

petitioner that he has paid only Rs.24,000/-. He has thus defaulted in paying the amount as

¶37

per the instalment granted in his favour.

¶38

In such circumstances, the first prayer

¶39

made in this writ petition cannot be granted.

¶40

However, since the appeal is pending in

¶41

respect of the period from 1/4/2006, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the 3rd respondent provided the petitioner clears the arrears of tax due as per the instalment facility already granted to him by the Government within three weeks and to produce the receipt thereof before the Appellate Authority.

¶42

Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

¶43

P.R.RAMAN,

¶44

Judge.

¶45

kcv.

Prince Joseph v. Joint Rto, Mattancherry.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prince Joseph v. Joint Rto, Mattancherry.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babu K.A. Vs State of Kerala

K.N.Abdulla Vs Secretary, R.T.a., Vadakara

Bharath Village Indstl.Co-Op.Society Ltd. Vs Kerala Khadi & Village Indsts.Board,Tvm

Paravanna Ice Plant Vs the K.S.E.B and Another

Fathima Mohammed Vs Rta., Thrissur

Reji Chacko Vs State of Kerala