Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.25 seconds)Section 48 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Shri Ratan vs The State Transport Authority, Jaipur ... on 28 January, 1959
6.1 If the authority has issued the Circular
only in the guise of workload, the Circular would fail
to stand for a moment. However the Circular says that
the object is to prevent fraudulent transfer by asking
transferor and transferee to submit their application
with their signatures notarised. As far as this aspect
is concerned, submission of learned advocate for the
petitioner could not be brushed aside lightly that it
is not the transport authority which effects ownership
Page 5 of 6
HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Sat Feb 06 01:07:01 IST 2016
C/SCA/11474/2015 ORDER
but the transfer in law is under the Sale of Goods
Act. Decisions in Shri Ratan Vs The State Transport
Authority, Jaipur [AIR 1959 Rajasthan 175],
Santakumari Vs R.T.O. and Registering Authority,
Kozhikode [AIR 1976 Kerala 17] and Nemanna Yellappa
Khanaji Vs Syndicate Bank, Ankola [AIR 1979 Karnataka
182] were relied on. The proposition laid down in the
aforesaid judgments was fortified by the Apex Court in
Industrial Credit and Development Syndicate Limited
Vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Mysore [(2013) 3 SCC
541], in particular paragraph 28, to which the
attention of Court was invited by learned advocate for
the petitioner.
Santakumari vs R.T.O. And Registering Authority, ... on 3 March, 1975
6.1 If the authority has issued the Circular
only in the guise of workload, the Circular would fail
to stand for a moment. However the Circular says that
the object is to prevent fraudulent transfer by asking
transferor and transferee to submit their application
with their signatures notarised. As far as this aspect
is concerned, submission of learned advocate for the
petitioner could not be brushed aside lightly that it
is not the transport authority which effects ownership
Page 5 of 6
HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Sat Feb 06 01:07:01 IST 2016
C/SCA/11474/2015 ORDER
but the transfer in law is under the Sale of Goods
Act. Decisions in Shri Ratan Vs The State Transport
Authority, Jaipur [AIR 1959 Rajasthan 175],
Santakumari Vs R.T.O. and Registering Authority,
Kozhikode [AIR 1976 Kerala 17] and Nemanna Yellappa
Khanaji Vs Syndicate Bank, Ankola [AIR 1979 Karnataka
182] were relied on. The proposition laid down in the
aforesaid judgments was fortified by the Apex Court in
Industrial Credit and Development Syndicate Limited
Vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Mysore [(2013) 3 SCC
541], in particular paragraph 28, to which the
attention of Court was invited by learned advocate for
the petitioner.
The Sale Of Goods Act, 1930
Nemanna Yellappa Khanaji vs Syndicate Bank, Ankola And Ors. on 2 April, 1979
6.1 If the authority has issued the Circular
only in the guise of workload, the Circular would fail
to stand for a moment. However the Circular says that
the object is to prevent fraudulent transfer by asking
transferor and transferee to submit their application
with their signatures notarised. As far as this aspect
is concerned, submission of learned advocate for the
petitioner could not be brushed aside lightly that it
is not the transport authority which effects ownership
Page 5 of 6
HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Sat Feb 06 01:07:01 IST 2016
C/SCA/11474/2015 ORDER
but the transfer in law is under the Sale of Goods
Act. Decisions in Shri Ratan Vs The State Transport
Authority, Jaipur [AIR 1959 Rajasthan 175],
Santakumari Vs R.T.O. and Registering Authority,
Kozhikode [AIR 1976 Kerala 17] and Nemanna Yellappa
Khanaji Vs Syndicate Bank, Ankola [AIR 1979 Karnataka
182] were relied on. The proposition laid down in the
aforesaid judgments was fortified by the Apex Court in
Industrial Credit and Development Syndicate Limited
Vs Commissioner of Income Tax, Mysore [(2013) 3 SCC
541], in particular paragraph 28, to which the
attention of Court was invited by learned advocate for
the petitioner.
1