Allowed

Joseph Manoj.O.X. v. Additional Registering Authority & Anor

Kerala HC21 May 2012RP/344/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a review petition challenging a judgment that dismissed a writ petition regarding vehicle registration. The petitioner submitted a notification classifying vehicles with generators as non-transport vehicles, which was not considered in the original judgment. The court allowed the review and recalled the previous order to re-hear the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The judgment delivered on 6.1.2011 dismissing W.P.(C) No.22376 of 2010 was recalled, and the writ petition was posted for hearing.

Joseph Manoj.O.X. Vs Additional Registering Authority… — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2012/31ST VAISAKHA 1934

¶5

RP.No. 344 of 2011 ( )

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC.22376/2010 DATED 06-01-2011.

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

¶8

JOSEPH MANOJ. O.X., ODATHUMPARAMBIL HOUSE, NAZARETH, KOCHI-2.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.K.V.SOHAN, SMT.SREEJA SOHAN.K.

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1. ADDITIONAL REGISTERING AUTHORITY, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,

¶12

MATTANCHERRY, THOPPUMPADY. P.O., COCHIN-682 005.

¶13

2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER FOR

¶14

STATE OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.M.T. SHEEBA.

¶16

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-05-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

rs.

¶18

RP.No. 344 of 2011

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶21

EXT.P6 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.S.O.1248(E) DATED 05/11/2004 ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF SHIPPING, ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS.

¶22

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.

¶27

R.P.No.344 of 2011 in W.P(C).No.22376 of 2010

¶28

Dated this the 21^st day of May, 2012

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

The petitioner in W.P.(C)No.22376 of 2010 has filed this review petition seeking a review of the judgment delivered by me on 6.1.2011 dismissing the writ petition. It is stated that Ext.P6 notification issued by the Central Government under sub-section (4) of section 41 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, produced along with the review petition, was not brought to the notice of this Court, that as per the said notification vehicles fitted with generators are classified as non-transport vehicles and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to have his motor vehicle registered as a non-transport vehicle.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel appearing on both sides. The first respondent resisted the writ petition by filing a counter affidavit dated 26.7.2010. Though in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit it was contended that the vehicle in question is a transport vehicle and reference was also made to the notification issued by the Central Government, a copy thereof was not

¶32

R.P(C).No.344 of 2011

¶33

-:2:-

¶34

produced. The attention of this Court was not therefore, drawn to the said notification. The writ petition was disposed of by this Court by the judgment sought to be reviewed having regard to the definition of the term “goods” occurring in sub-section (13) of section 2, the term “goods carriage” occurring in sub-section (14) of section 2 and the terms “transport vehicle” occurring in subsection (47) of section 2 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In such circumstances as Ext.P6 notification issued by the Central Government was not brought to the notice of this Court and this Court had not considered the said notification, I am of the opinion that the judgment delivered by me on 6.1.2011 in W.P.(C) No.22376 of 2010 requires to be recalled.

¶35

I accordingly allow the review petition and recall the judgment delivered on 6.1.2011 dismissing W.P.(C)No.22376 of 2010. Registry is directed to post the writ petition for hearing as per roster next week.

¶36

P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge.

¶37

ahg.

¶38

P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.

¶39

R.P.No.344 of 2011 in W.P(C).No.22376 of 2010

¶40

O R D E R

¶41

21^st May, 2012

Joseph Manoj.O.X. v. Additional Registering Authority & Anor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joseph Manoj.O.X. v. Additional Registering Authority & Anor

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

Nazeer Huzain Vs State of Kerala

P.a.Hussain Vs State of Kerala

Korea Electric Power Data Network Vs the Govt. of Kerala

M.Vrinda Devi Vs Roopkala S.Jagath

M.N.Ravunni Vs Roopkala S.Jagath

P.S.John Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Op.Societies