SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
GITA MITTAL, C.HARI SHANKAR
Nyaya Bhoomi – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Gita Mittal, Acting Chief Justice The petitioner, a society which claims to be working in the domain of transport, by way of the instant writ petition, made a grievance that the vehicles of the Rashtrapati Bhawan; office of the Vice-President; the Raj Niwas and the Protocol Division of the Ministry of External Affairs do not display registration marks on their vehicles. Instead the registration mark stands replaced by the State Emblem of India.

2. The petitioner has contended that registration mark on vehicles is mandatory under Section 41(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which relates to the manner in which registration of vehicles is to be effected. Section 41(6) of the Act reads as follows:

    "41. Registration, how to be made.-

    xxx xxx xxx

    (6) The registering authority shall assign to the vehicle, for display thereon, a distinguishing mark (in this Act referred to as the registration mark) consisting of one of the groups of such of those letters and followed by such letters and figures as are allotted to the State by the Central Government from time to time by notification in the Official Gazette, and displayed and shown on the motor vehicle in such form and in such m


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top