Registered owner of an HGV goods carriage used for film shooting sought renewal of fitness certificate for a vehicle with a mounted generator. The court, relying on Vinu Vincent, held the alteration impermissible and dismissed the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 1156 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
WE ONE ENTERPRISES REP BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR A R SASEEDHARAN AGED 52 YEARS RADHA BHAVAN,PJRRA 41 PALARIVATTOM(PO) KALAVATH ROAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682025
BY ADVS. SARATHKUMAR.T.S JISMEMOL JAMES ACHANKUNJU P.C RONY V.P. SHYAM KUMAR M.P
RESPONDENT:
THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682030
BY SRI.SREEJITH V.S., GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.1156/2024
: 2 :
N. NAGARESH, J.
W.P.(C) No.1156 of 2024
Dated this the 8th day of April, 2024
J U D G M E N T
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The petitioner, who is registered owner of a HGVGoods Carriage vehicle, has filed this writ petition seeking to command the respondents to grant permission for alteration of the vehicle as a generator mounted vehicle and to issue fitness certificate.
W.P.(C) No.1156/2024
: 3 :
respondents have not renewed the fitness certificate.
the petitioner was informed that the vehicle cannot be given fitness certificate with a generator mounted on it, since it would be in violation of Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. According to the petitioner, since the vehicle was granted renewal of fitness on 18.11.2019 and 07.12.2021 without any objection, the respondents cannot raise objections now. In Ext.P3 judgment, this Court has clarified that fitting of goods carriage vehicle with generator sets does not amount to alteration of the basic feature of the vehicle.
W.P.(C) No.1156/2024
: 4 :
respondents.
The Additional Registering Authority (Joint Regional Transport Officer) [2020 (3) KLT 547] has held that when alteration to a vehicle does not conform to the prescriptions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the prototype approval granted by the Automobile Research Association of India as obtained by the manufacturer, such alteration made would not enable registration of the vehicle as a non-transport vehicle. This Court held that such alteration can result in the registration itself being declined.
W.P.(C) No.1156/2024
: 5 :
Rule 92(1). Rule 92(1) has to be read as subservient to the provisions contained in Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Various provisions in Chapter V are additional safeguards to what is prohibited in Section 52(1). What has been specified originally by the manufacturers and once that has been entered in the particulars in the certificate of registration, cannot be varied. No vehicle can be altered so as to change original specification made by the manufacturer. In the afore facts of the case, the petitioner's arguments are unsustainable.
The writ petition is therefore dismissed.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/06.04.2024
W.P.(C) No.1156/2024
: 6 :
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1156/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION DATED 22/11/2017 Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 27/11/2023 Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WRIT PETITION CIVIL NO 8881/2010 BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES
Annexure - R1(a) True copy of the S.O 1248 (E) dated 05/11/2024
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a HGV goods carriage fitted with a generator can be granted a renewed fitness certificate without violating Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Vinu Vincent v. The Additional Registering Authority (Joint Regional Transport Officer)Relied on¶6
[2020 (3) KLT 547]
2 provisions across 2 enactments
WE ONE ENTERPRISES rep. by its Managing Partner Mr A R Saseedharan
The Joint Regional Transport Officer, Ernakulam
N. NAGARESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
