Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.90 seconds)Section 96 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Sree Gajanana Motor Transport Co. Ltd vs The State Of Karnataka And Ors on 22 September, 1976
The High Court relied upon the judgment of this Court in Sree
Gajanana Motor Transport Co. Ltd. v. The State of Karnataka and
Ors. , arising under Section 43 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, to the
effect that when the State has exercised its power under Section 43
(corresponding to the present Section 67 of the 1988 Act), then the
conditions of the permit automatically get altered. There is no doubt as to
this proposition, but the rub is that the notification must have been validly
issued in exercise of the said power. Paragraph 3(b) of the impugned
notification, however, travels much beyond the legitimate scope of the
power under Section 67(1)(d) read with sub-clause (i). We are of the view
that the impugned notification, insofar the condition in Paragraph 3(b) is
concerned, is wholly ultra vires the powers of the State Government under
Section 67 of the Act, illegal and liable to be quashed and set aside.