Disposed

Sunilkumar.K v. Joint Regional Transport Officer

Kerala HC7 Oct 2020WP(C)/10404/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed writ petition regarding registration discrepancy of a motor vehicle. Court directed petitioner to approach civil or criminal forums for redressal and granted exclusion of limitation period under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach civil/criminal forums. Exclusion of limitation period granted under Section 14 of the Limitation Act.

Sunilkumar.K Vs Joint Regional Transport Officer — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 15TH ASWINA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.10404 OF 2017(A)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SUNILKUMAR.K

¶8

AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, ETTONNIL VEEDU, EDANAD P.O., CHENGANNUR-689121, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.

SRI.G.HARIHARAN

SRI.PRAVEEN.H.

RESPONDENTS:

1 JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER CHENGANNUR-689121, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶14

2 SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER KOYILANDY-673018, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶15

3 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHENGANNUR POLICE STATION, CHENGANNUR-689121, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶16

4 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CHENGANNUR-689121, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶17

5 LINISH

¶18

S/O.KRISHNAN, KAAYIKKAL HOUSE, KOYILANDI-673620, KOZHIKODE.

¶19

6 JAREESH

¶20

S/O.MR.AHMED, VALOYTTIL HOUSE, ULLIYERI P.O.-673323, KOYILANDI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶21

R1-R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.MABLE C. KURIAN R6 BY ADV. SMT.REKHA ARAVIND R6 BY ADV. SRI.SANTHARAM.P

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

SATHISH NINAN, J.

¶24

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No.10404 of 2017 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7^th day of October, 2020

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

Two bullet motor cycles bear the same registration No.KBT 4944; one vehicle stands registered in the name of the petitioner and the other in the name of the sixth respondent. The petitioner claims that he had sold his vehicle to the 5^th respondent, but the registration particulars were not changed in the name of the 5^th respondent since as per the records of the registering authority the vehicle with the said registration number stands registered in the name of the sixth respondent. The second respondent-Sub Regional Transport Officer, Koyilandy contends that one of the registration certificates is fabricated; as to which among them is the fabricated one can be ascertained only on taking evidence. A scientific inspection by the Forensic Department and also by the police would be necessary, submits the learned Government Pleader. The petitioner alleges that

¶27

W.P.(C) No.10404 of 2017

¶28

:- 2 :-

¶29

though complaints are given to police, no action is being taken.

¶30

The petitioner needs to approach the civil and/or criminal forums for redressal of his grievance. In the event of the petitioner approaching the civil court, the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of exclusion of the period from 24.03.2017 viz. the date of filing of the writ petition till 08.10.2020 viz. the date of passing of this judgment, for the purpose of

¶31

Section 14 of the Limitation Act.

¶32

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶33

Sd/- SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy//

P.S. to Judge

WP(C).No.10404 OF 2017(A)

¶38

APPENDIX

¶39

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶40

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE RELATING TO VEHICLE NO.KBT 4944. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 28-09-2016 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 18-11-2016 SUBMITTED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 21-11-2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15-12-2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 16-12-2016 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15-12-2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20-12-2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

Sunilkumar.K v. Joint Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunilkumar.K v. Joint Regional Transport Officer

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

Vincent Y Vs the Karunagappally Co-Operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd.

B.K.Prasad Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Kunhi Abbas Vs State of Kerala

Rajesh V.N. Vs Joint Regional Transport Officer

Jayalakshmi P. Vs Union of India

P.N.Sreenivasan Vs the District Collector/District Magistrate