Kerala High Court
Laila Sain vs The Joint Regional Transport Officer
Author: P.R. Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST 2012/16TH SRAVANA 1934
WP(C).No. 18260 of 2012 (F)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
LAILA SAIN,, AGED 50 YEARS
W/O SAIN.T. VARGHESE, THUNDIYIL HOUSE,
AZHIYEDATHUCHIRA P.O, THIRUVALLA - 689 113.
BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.CHACKO
SMT.C.M.CHARISMA
RESPONDENT(S):
---------------------------
1. THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
THIRUVALLA - 689 101.
2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R),
TALUK OFFICE, THIRUVALLA 689 101.
3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
KAVAUMBHAGOM VILLAGE OFFICE, THIRUVALLA - 689 102.
R1 TO R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. P.A.REZIYA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 07-08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Kss
WPC.NO.18260/2012 F
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT. P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 1-11-03 BETWEEN
PETITIONER AND NARAYANAN NAIR.
EXT. P2 TRUE COPY OF THE R.R NOTICE DATED 28-07-2006.
EXT. P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS COURT DATED 25-01-2007
IN WPC NO 22935/06.
EXT. P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 25-10-07 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
EXT. P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS COURT DATED 30-01-2008
IN WPC NO 36111/07.
EXT. P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS COURT DATED 22-05-12 IN
WA NO 1302/08.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO JUDGE
Kss
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
..............................................................................
W.P. ) No. 18260 OF 2012
.........................................................................
Dated this the 7th August, 2012
J U D G M E N T
The dispute is in respect of the coercive steps pursued against the petitioner for realisation of the amount due towards tax under the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act in respect of the vehicle bearing No.KL.04/2929.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the said vehicle which is a contract carriage (Tourist Mini bus) was purchased by the petitioner from one Johnson K. John. Few months later, it was transferred to one Narayanan Nair on the strength of Ext.P1 agreement. It was quite after several years that the petitioner was served with Ext.P2 notice directing to satisfy a sum of Rs.2,30.408/- as 'tax arrears' for the period from 01.04.2004 to 03.06.2006, which was challenged by filing W.P.(C) 22935 of 2006, leading to Ext.P3 judgment, directing the departmental authorities to trace out the vehicle and to proceed against the same as well. However, observing that the petitioner being the registered owner of the vehicle, was liable to satisfy the arrears of tax, the departmental authorities were also directed to enquire W.P. ) No. 18260 OF 2012 2 into the matter and to take steps to cancel the registration certificate so as to absolve the petitioner from further liability.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that inspite of the direction, the departmental authorities could not trace out the vehicle and the petitioner was served with Ext.P4 memo dated 25.10.2007 directing to satisfy a further sum of Rs.91,800/- towards 'additional tax' in respect of the period from 01.07.2006 to 30.09.2007. This was challenged by filing W.P.(C) 36111 of 2007, wherein interference was declined as per Ext.P5 judgment, which in turn was further challenged by filing W.A.No.1302 of 2008. During the pendency of the above writ appeal, it is stated that the petitioner was given to understand that the petitioner could seek for the benefit of installment facility if the pending proceedings (i.e. writ appeal) could be sought to be withdrawn. Accordingly, the petitioner was constrained to get the appeal dismissed as 'not pressed', as discernible from Ext. P6 dated 22.05.2012. After getting the appeal dismissed as above, the petitioner approached the respondents for the benefit of installments, which was not entertained, thus driving the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the present writ W.P. ) No. 18260 OF 2012 3 petition. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the present liability is in respect of the period from 01.04.2004 to 03.06.2006 and that the only relief pressed before this Court is to permit the petitioner to clear the liability in a phased manner .
4. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.
5. After hearing both the sides, this Court finds it fit and proper to permit the petitioner to clear the subsisting liability by way of '10' equal monthly installments, the first of which shall be effected on or before 30.08.2012, to be followed by similar installments to be effected on or before the 30th of the succeeding months. It is made clear that if any default is committed by the petitioner in effecting the installments as above, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed with further steps for realisation of the amount in a lump from the stage where it stands now.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
lk