( 1 ) THE twin questions which have fallen for consideration herein are. (I) Whether the crane is a motor vehicle within the meaning of Section 2 (28) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short, the "1988 Central Act") thereby making the same exigible to tax under the provisions of the Karnataka motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957 (for short, "the Taxation act") and, (ii) If found to be so exigible, under-which item of Part-A to the Schedule of the Taxation Act will it fall for the purpose of determining the rate of tax?

( 2 ) THE 1st and 2nd petitioners are respectively the owners of cranes bearing Registration No. CKI 4482 and CKJ 5187. These two vehicles were registered on 8-9-1986 and 5-9-1987 as cranes. The tax payable in respect of these vehicles was assessed at Rs. 500/- per quarter under Item 16 of Part-A of the Schedule to the taxation Act. Since according to the taxation authorities, the vehicles should have been classified as goods vehicles and made liable to higher rate of tax, petitioners were served with notices to the said effect (Annexures-A and B ).

( 3 ) PETITIONERS filed their objections to the proposed actions. But the same were rejected. Consequently, they were subjected to higher rate of tax treating the cranes as goods vehicles on the basis of their actual RLW as certified by the manufacturers. Petitioners thereupon went in appeals under Section 15 of the said Act. But the same were also dismissed by a composite order dated 26-6-1992 (Annexure-C ). Consequently, they have been served with demand notice Annexures-D and E requiring them to pay difference of tax for the period from 1-3-1991 to 31-8-1992. Petitioners seek quashing of the appellate order and the consequential demand notices. Re: Question No. 1

( 4 ) SECTION 2 (28) of the 1988 Central Act defines "motor Vehicle" or "vehicle" to mean. "any mechanically propelled vehicle adapted for use upon roads whether the power of propulsion is transmitted thereto from an external or internal source and includes a chassis to which a body has not been attached and a trailer, but does not include a vehicle running upon fixed rails or a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises or a vehicle having less than four wheels fitted with engine capacity of not exceeding thirty five cubic centimeters".

( 5 ) IT is not in dispute that the cranes used to be of various types having varying and different capacities of hooks, heights, chassis, travel speeds and the hoist speeds. They have the mobility and are also suitable for use on a public road so far as the movement is concerned. The cranes invariably will have driver's cab. It also contains seat. It contains mechanism of operating the crane in order to load or unload the goods either horizontally or vertically by hooking the same. But in respect of such cranes it cannot be said that the same are adapted for use only in a factory or any other enclosed premises. Admittedly, the cranes in question are mobile cranes and can be used at any place accessible to road. In this view of the matter, it cannot be seriously disputed that the cranes are motor vehicles within the meaning of Section 2 (28) of the Motor Vehicles Act. A similar view has been taken by a Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Ishardas and Company and Others v State of maharashtra and Another. Similarly, in the case of M/s. Central Coal Fields Limited v State of Orissa and Others, dumpers and rockers have been held to be motor vehicles since those were found to be adapted for use on road.

( 6 ) SECTION 3 of the Taxation Act provides for levy of tax at the rates specified in Part-A of the Schedule on all motor vehicles suitable for use on road. In the present case, as noticed above, it cannot be disputed that the cranes in question are motor vehicles suitable for use on roads. Accordingly, these are liable for levy of tax under the provisions of the Taxation Act. Re. Question No. 2

(