The main legal point established in the judgment is that the tax is imposed on all motor vehicles used or kept for use in the State, and that the Act provides for exemption from tax under certain circumstances. The court emphasized that the tax is only exigible on vehicles used for use on public roads and that exemption from payment of tax can be claimed if the requirements of the Act are satisfied.

1. These three appeals are by special leave granted by this Court against the judgment and order of the High Court of Kerala in Writ Appeals Nos. 451, 630 and 807 of 1969 respectively. The questions that arise for consideration in all the three appeals are the same and can be dealt with together. As the facts so far as they are necessary for decision in these appeals are similar, we will confine the judgment to the facts in Civil Appeal No. 437 of 1970.

The appellant in Civil Appeal No. 437 of 1970 is Travancore Tea Estates Co. Ltd. Vandiperiyar in Kerala State. The Ist respondent is the State of Kerala and respondents Nos. 2 to 4 are the authorities functioning under the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act (Act 24 of 1963) which will hereafter be referred to as the Act, was brought into force on 1-7-63. The Act provides that 'a tax at the rates fixed by the Government by notification in the Gazette not exceeding the maximum rates specified in the First Schedule shall be levied on all Motor Vehicles used or kept for use in the State. The appellant company owned 17 motor vehicles, tractors, trailers and lorries all of which are registered in the company's name under the Motor Vehicles Act. The company alleged that the vehicles were purchased by it solely and exclusively for use in the estates and intended to be used only for agricultural purpose and were not used nor kept for use in the State as contemplated under S.3 of the Act. The company is a tea plantation having eight estates which lie contiguous to each other and have an extent of 9422 44 acres in the aggregate. The company for the purpose of plantation are maintaining roads fit for vehicular traffic in the eight estates covering a length of 131 miles in the aggregate. On 23rd September, 1964 a Bedford lorry owned by the company and bearing registration No. KLK-1540 was ceased by the police and taken into custody under S 13 of the Act. According to the appellant the seizure was effected in Tengamullay Estate which is one of the eight estates owned by the company. The company wrote to the Department on 28-12-1964 stating that the vehicle was being used for agricultural purpose on private roads in the Estates and the Company is not liable to pay tax and asked for the release of the vehicle. On the company paying a sum of Rs. 3,150/- as tax under protest for the period between 1-7-63 to 31-12-64, the vehicle was released. The department proceeded to prosecute the appellant in the Peermade 1st Class Magistrate's Court and the case is still pending The appellant company filed O.P.No. 199/65 before the High Court of Kerala claiming that they were not liable to pay any tax on the motor vehicles. The High Court by its judgment dt. 3rd March, 1966 directed the Regional Transport Officer, Kbttayam-2nd respondent herein, to examine the question raised in the writ petition and to pass final orders. It also directed that if the petitioner was aggrieved with the order he was at liberty to approach the High Court. In the meanwhile it directed stay of prosecution and collection of tax. The matter was taken up for consideration by the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent rejected the pleas of the appellant and by his order dt.12-4 68 held that the 13 vehicles mentioned in the Original Petition were liable to pay tax under the Act. The appellant filed a petition before the High Court for appropriate relief. The High Court disposed of the petition O.P. No. 2173/63 along with O.P. No. 2081/68 filed by Peermade Tea Co. who are the appellants in CA. 438/70 in this Court, by a common order dated 19th December, 1968. The learned judge held that the language in S.3 of the Act showed that there is a departure from the legislative policy of restricting the tax liability only to vehicles using public roads. It held that the tax is imposed by S.3 on all the motor vehicles used or kept for use is the State irrespective of any question as to whether they are used or kept for use on public road