Allowed

Iqbal v. the Regional Transport Officer

Kerala HC11 Mar 2010WP(C)/6663/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a writ petition challenging permission denied for converting a goods vehicle into a Generator Van for cinema outdoor units. Perceiving no impact on vehicle features or chassis, the court held such alteration permissible.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order is set aside; permission granted for converting goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-13/C 6759 into a Generator Van within three weeks.

Iqbal Vs the Regional Transport Officer — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2010/ 5TH JYAISHTA 1932

¶4

WP(C).No. 6663 of 2010(G)

¶5

---------------------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

------------------------

¶8

1. IQBAL, KARIVELITHUNDIYIL HOUSE, PULLEPADY, PADMA, ERNAKULAM.

¶9

2. SHAMSUDEEN, KARIVELITHUNDIYIL HOUSE, COTTENCANAL ROAD, ERNAKULAM.

¶10

BY ADV. MR.O.D.SIVADAS

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

----------------------------

¶13

THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ERNAKULAM.

¶14

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Kss

¶17

K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------W.P.(C) No.6663 of 2010

¶18

Dated this the 11^th day of March, 2010

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The first petitioner had purchased a goods vehicle and submitted an application for converting the same into a Generator Van. The first petitioner wanted to fix a generator therein, for being used as part of Cinema Outdoor Units. The vehicle has subsequently been purchased by the second petitioner. The alteration of the vehicle was not permitted on the ground that the same was against the provisions of Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

¶21

I have disposed of other Writ Petitions where similar issues had arisen for determination as per my judgments in W.P.(c) No.2738/2010 and W.P.(C) No.3108/2010. As per the said judgments, I have found that alteration of passenger vehicle by fitting generator sets do not amount to alteration of the basic features of the vehicle since no alteration is made to the chassis. The vehicle in the present case is a goods vehicle. Therefore,

¶22

wpc No.6663/2010 2

¶23

the dictum in the said case applies with stronger force to this case also because there is not even a conversion of the vehicle from a passenger vehicle to a goods vehicle. Therefore, this Writ Petition is only to be allowed.

¶24

Accordingly, Ext.P1 order is set aside. The respondent shall grant permission for alteration of the goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-13/C 6759 as a Generator Van as sought for by the petitioners within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶25

K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE

¶26

css/

Iqbal v. the Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Iqbal v. the Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj K Vs Subhash

Usman Vs Rta,Palakkad

Manoj K Vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation

P.D.Mathew @ Sebastian Mathew Vs District Executive Officer

Iqubal Vs the Regional Transport Officer

T.K.Babu Vs Secretary, Rta Thrissur