Disposed

Sarada v. the Transport Commissioner

Kerala HC4 Jan 2013WP(C)/395/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition concerning the registration of a Mahindra Bolero Maxi Truck as a non-transport vehicle. The court held that registration as a non-transport vehicle is legally permissible, provided the petitioner undertakes not to use the vehicle for hiring or rewarding passenger carriage.

What did the court decide?

Registration of the vehicle as a non-transport vehicle allowed upon undertaking not to carry passengers for hire.

Sarada Vs the Transport Commissioner — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/14TH POUSHA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 395 of 2013 (Y)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

SARADA, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.VISWAMBHARAN, VAYAKATTIL MATHUKATTIL HOUSE, THRITHALLUR P.O, THRISSUR – 680 619.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.JAGAN ABRAHAM M.GEORGE SRI.P.G.PRAMOD SRI.KANDAMPULLY RAHUL SRI.K.A.NOUSHAD

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM, KERALA – 695 001.

¶11

2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, AYYANTHOL, THRISSUR – 680 003.

¶12

BY ADV.SRI.P.M.SANEER, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

WP(C).No. 395 of 2013 (Y)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶18

EXT.P1:	COPY OF THE SALE CERTIFICATE DATED 18.12.2012 OF THE VEHICHLE OF THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P2:	COPY OF THE FORM 20 APPLICATION.
EXT.P3:	COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 18.12.2012.
EXT.P4:	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.C NO.27183/2012 DATED 16.11.2012 IN RESPECT OF SIMILAR VEHICHLE OF THAT OF THE PETITIONER.

¶19

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS -

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A TO JUDGE

V.CHITAMBARESH, J.

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.(C).No.395 of 2013

¶27

Dated this the 04^th day of January, 2013

¶28

J U D G M E N T

¶29

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and Government pleader for the respondents.

¶30

The issue is covered by the judgments in Cherian V. Transport Commissioner (2009 (2) KLT 583) and in Jagan Thomas V. State of Kerala (2012 (2) KLT 365). There can be no objection in law to register the 'Mahindra Bolero Maxi Truck' as a non transport vehicle. Exhibit P3 representation put in by the petitioner deserves to be dealt with by the second respondent accordingly. The petitioner shall however filed an affidavit before the second respondent undertaking not to use the vehicle for carriage of passengers on hire or reward.

¶31

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

V.CHITAMBARESH, JUDGE.

¶34

//TRUE COPY//

¶35

P.A TO JUDGE

¶36

Sarada v. the Transport Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarada v. the Transport Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jahana Vs Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Kseb, Athirampuzha

Unnikrishnan Vs Assistant Engineer

V.M.Noufal Vs Assistant Engineer, Electrical Section, Kseb

N.Radhamma Vs Thankappan Chettiyar

M.K.Chandran Vs S.Roopakala Jagath

K.C Pratheepkumar Vs Pramod Kumar