Kerala High Court
Jaseena Abbas vs The Joint Rto & Additional Registering ... on 1 February, 2016
Author: Anu Sivaraman
Bench: Anu Sivaraman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1939
WP(C).No. 6720 of 2018
PETITIONER:
JASEENA ABBAS,
AGED 32 YEARS, W/O.ABBAS C.M.,
CHITTETHUKUDY HOUSE, PANIPRA P.O.,
KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN-686 692.
BY ADVS.DR.SEBASTIAN CHAMPAPPILLY
SRI.P.A.SAINUDEEN
DR.ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA
SRI.GEORGE CLEETUS
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE JOINT RTO & ADDITIONAL REGISTERING AUTHORITY,
SUB RTO OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM P.O.,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691.
2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM,
PIN-682 030.
3. M/S.DAIMLER FINANCIAL SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD.,
MR 161A7, MANAKAPARAMB ROAD, EDAPPALLY,
COCHIN-682 024.
R1 & R2 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.S.SHEEJA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 15-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
sts
21/3/2018
WP(C).No. 6720 of 2018 (L)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF SALES CERTIFICATE DATED 1-2-2016.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF FORM-22 (ROAD WORTHINESS
CERTIFICATE) ISSUED BY THE MANUFACTURER.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF
REGISTRATION WITH REGISTRATION NO.KL-39-J-TEMP-7950
ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE
ADDITIONAL REGISTERING AUTHORITY, THRIPPUNITHURA.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF POLICY SCHEDULE CUM CERTIFICATE
OF INSURANCE VALID FROM 3-5-2017 TO 2-5-2018.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.28374 OF
2017 DATED 14-9-2017.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.4554 OF 2011
DATED 12-7-2011.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.31762 OF 2009
DATED 1ST DECEMBER 2010.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.R5/9875/2017/E DATED 28-10-2017
PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE DATED 1-12-2017
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT 10 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 15-12-2017 ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FOR PERMANENT
REGISTRATION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 3-1-2018.
EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 3-2-2018 GIVEN
TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.R1/8/2018/EK DATED 5-2-2018
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX LICENCE ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT ON 6-2-2018 IN THE NAME OF THE
PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
sts/21/3/2018
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
......................................................
W.P.(C).No.6720 of 2018
.........................................................
Dated this the 15th day of March, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking directions to the respondents to consider Ext.P11 application preferred by the petitioner for permanent registration of the vehicle bearing temporary Registration No.KL-39-J TEMP 7950 in the petitioner's name. It is submitted that the vehicle was initially purchased by one C.R.Krishnaprasad and a temporary registration was obtained, but he defaulted payment to the financier and the vehicle was repossessed and sold to the petitioner before permanent registration was effected.
2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that Ext.P8 order had been issued by the Regional Transport Authority, Ernakulam, stating W.P.(C).No.6720 of 2018 : 2 : that the financier of the vehicle is entitled to get the registration changed in his name. However, it is only because the Registering authority in respect of the vehicle owned by the address of the purchaser was in Thrissur that the registration was not changed in favour of the petitioner. It is stated that the vehicle had been brought by the petitioner from the financier and that the petitioner had made Ext.P11 application for change of registration in her name. It is contended that in view of Ext.P8 order, Ext.P11 application made by the petitioner cannot be considered.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I am of the opinion that Ext.P11 application made by the petitioner for change of registration to her name is liable to be considered in accordance with law. It is the petitioner's contention that the vehicle had been re-possessed by the financier before it was registered in the name of the original purchaser and had been sold to the petitioner by W.P.(C).No.6720 of 2018 : 3 : the financier. Since the vehicle was sold to the petitioner by the financier, the contention that Ext.P8 would stand in the way of the vehicle being registered in the petitioner's name is therefore unsustainable.
4. In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction to the Registering Authority to consider Ext.P11 and to pass orders thereon, with notice to the petitioner, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE Bb/20/3/2018 [True copy] P.A to Judge