Disposed

Ashok A.M. v. Transport Commissioner

Kerala HC10 Nov 2014WP(C)/3238/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition arising from revenue recovery proceedings for vehicle tax, the court disposed of the matter on the撤回 of specific writ reliefs. The court directed the petitioner to pay the outstanding tax liability in two equal monthly instalments and kept the recovery proceedings in abeyance subject to timely payment.

What did the court decide?

Direction to liquidate entire liability by two equal monthly instalments; recovery proceedings kept in abeyance subject to timely payment.

Ashok A.M. Vs Transport Commissioner — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/19TH KARTHIKA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 3238 of 2013 (D)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

A.M.ASHOK, AGED 46, S/O.A.T.MARKOSE, ATTUVELIL HOUSE, RAMAMANGALAM, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686663.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.PRAMOD KOCHUTHOMMEN.E.

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

¶11

2. STATE OF KERALA,

¶12

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MOTOR VEHICLES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶13

3. JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,

¶14

MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686 661.

¶15

4. JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,

¶16

KOTHAMANGALAM, PIN-686691.

¶17

BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER DR.SEBASTIAN CHAMPAPPILLY

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

mbr/

¶20

WP(C).No. 3238 of 2013 (D)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS:

¶23

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL-07-D-7627.

¶24

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL-07-D-7627.

¶25

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT FOR 2007-2009.

¶26

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CLEARANCE CERTIFICATE DATED 19-4-2008 ISSUED FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

¶27

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEMAND DRAFT FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.8640/- DATED 17-2-2011 TAKEN INFAVOUR OF 3RD RESPONDENT DRAWN FROM UNION BANK OF INDIA, ORAMANA BRANCH.

¶28

EXHIBIT P6: THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION OF THE PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN ISSUED BY SALES TAX OFFICER KOTHAMANGALAM DATED 22.11.96.

¶29

EXHIBIT P7: THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.6928 OF 2011 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

¶30

EXHIBIT P8: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.S4/1205/2011/EK DATED 7-7-2011 PASSED BY 4TH RESPONDENT.

¶31

EXHIBIT P9: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY DEPUTY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL ZONE II, ERNAKULAM AS ORDER NO.C-3246/CZ-II/2012 DATED 25-1-2012.

¶32

EXHIBIT P10: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY DEPUTY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER IN ORDER NO.B1/4127/TC/2012 DATED 27.6.12.

¶33

EXHIBIT P11: THE PHOTOGRAPS (4 NOS.) OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL-7 D 7627.

¶34

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: - NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

mbr/

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J

¶39

W.P.(C) No.3238 of 2013

¶40

Dated this the 10^th day of November 2014

¶41

J U D G M E N T

¶42

The petitioner has approached this Court

¶43

seeking the following reliefs:

¶44

“ (A) To issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to Exhibit P10 order passed by the 1^st respondent and quash Exhibit P10 to the extent of fixing liablity to pay balance tax by the petitioner.

¶45

(B) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the 3^rd respondent, Regional Transport Officer, Muvattupuzha to accept the Exhibit P5 demand draft towards the tax amount for the year 2009-2011 for vehicle bearing registration No.KL-07-D7627 for the period 20092011 in the category Omnibus for Private use and issue a receipt forthwith and allow the petitioner to renew the certificate of registration of the vehicle with effect from 16.03.2013, so as to enable the petitioner to ply the vehicle and allow the petitioner to remit the tax of the vehicle in the category Omnibus for private use.

¶46

(C) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding 3^rd respondent to change the ownership of the vehicle in the name of the

¶47

W.P.(C) No.3238 of 2013 2

¶48

petitioner taking into consideration the sale letter in the name of the petitioner and to issue a new R.C. Book in the name of the petitioner in the category Omnibus for private use.

¶49

(D) Issue such other appropriate writ, order or direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

¶50

The tax liability for the period from 11.06.1998 to 30.06.2008 in respect of the vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-07-D7627 belonging to the petitioner came to be finalised by passing Ext.P10 order dated 27.06.2012 by the 1^st respondent. Non payment of the due amount led to proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act, which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing this writ petition.

¶51

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 1^st respondent, referring to the facts and figures and as to the nature and extent of liability involved, seeking to sustain the impugned proceedings.

¶52

Today, when the matter is taken up for further consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not intend to press the

¶53

W.P.(C) No.3238 of 2013 3

¶54

challenge any further and that he might be permitted to clear the entire outstanding liability by way of two equal monthly instalments.

¶55

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to liquidate the entire liability as on date, by way of two equal monthly instalments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 30^th of this month, followed by the next one on or before 30^th of December 2014. Subject to this, the recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that, if any default is committed with regard to the satisfaction of the instalments on time as aforesaid, it will be open for the respondent Bank to proceed with further steps in accordance with law, from the stage where it stand now.

¶56

Sd/-

¶57

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶58

JUDGE

¶59

Ashok A.M. v. Transport Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok A.M. v. Transport Commissioner

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

Antony K.R Vs N.a.Kripa

P.K.Ashraf Vs Thangavelu

Rajagopalan T.N. Vs State of Kerala

Sangeetha Vijoy Arora Vs K.Ramachandran

Musafar Ahammed Vs University of Calicut

Pushpa R. Vs the Chief Manafger.the Authorised Officer, the Federal Bank Ltd.