Disposed

A.Sekhar Goud S/o Naganna Goud v. The Additional Registering authority Rta

Telangana HC21 Mar 2013WP/8266/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition regarding the non-delivery of a seized vehicle. It permitted the petitioner to file a written application for release under Section 207(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in light of the Transport Commissioner's circular, and closed the interim relief petition as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to make a written application for release of the seized vehicle; interim relief petition disposed of as infructuous.

A.Sekhar Goud S/o Naganna Goud Vs The Additional… — Motor Accident Claims | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.8266 of 2013 Date: 20.03.2013

¶3

Between: A.Sekhar Goud, S/o Naganna Goud

¶4

..... Petitioner

¶5

AND: The Additional Registering authority, RTA Mahaboobnagar, Mahaboobnagar District. rep. by its Secretary and another.

¶6

.....Respondents

¶7

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Y.Koteswara Rao

¶8

Counsel for the Respondents: AGP for Transport

¶9

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶10

This Writ Petition is filed with the grievance that despite order, dated 13.03.2013, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.7437 of 2013, respondent No.1 has not received the petitioner's application sought to be filed on 14.03.2013 for release of the seized vehicle bearing registration No.AP 29 TB 0049.

¶11

At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner has not so far made an application in writing, while stating that the respondents will scrupulously comply with the directions given by this Court in the above-mentioned order. He has also placed before the Court Circular Memo No.5/2312/E2/2013, dated 15.03.2013, issued by the Transport Commissioner, Hyderabad, wherein he has directed all the Transport

¶12

Officers to entertain the applications filed under Section 207(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rule-448-B of the A.P. Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, for release of the seized vehicles and dispose them of in accordance with law by passing speaking orders.

¶13

This Court places on record its appreciation for the immediate response shown by the Transport Commissioner by issuing the above-mentioned Circular. In the light of the facts pleaded by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to make an application in writing to enable respondent No.1 to pass appropriate order, as directed by this Court in the previous Writ Petition and also by the Transport Commissioner in his Circular, dated 15.03.2013.

¶14

As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.10334 of 2013, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.

¶15

__________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY 20^th March 2013 Note: Registry shall communicate a copy of this order to the Transport Commissioner. B/o DR

A.Sekhar Goud S/o Naganna Goud v. The Additional Registering authority Rta

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Sekhar Goud S/o Naganna Goud v. The Additional Registering authority Rta

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

A. Mallaiah S/o Parwathalu, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Jangam Ramesh Goud, S/o. Narayana Goud Vs The Commissioner

Bandam Laxmaiah, Vs The District Collector

P.Chandrasekhar Vs The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise

D.Chandrakala, Vs The Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited

M/s Asreddy Infratech Pvt. LTd., Vs A.P. Housing Board