Ramachandran Nair, J.

1. The question raised in the connected appeals is whether the learned single Judge was justified in upholding the additional demand of motor vehicle tax made under Section 26 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1976, hereinafter called the "Act" in relation to additional seats permissible in terms of the seating capacity of the vehicle under Rule 269 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, hereinafter called the "Rules" over the actual number of seats for which registration and permit are granted under the Motor Vehicles Act. We have heard counsel appearing for the appellants in all the appeals and Government Pleader for the respondents.

2. There is no dispute on facts which led to the controversy inasmuch as appellants operating stage carriages were remitting tax in terms of the tax endorsement in the RC book which is consistent with the details contained in the certificate of registration and the permit issued by the licensing authority. Respondents' case is that tax is payable based on seating capacity of the stage carriage and the escapement in payment of tax happened because of lower number of seating capacity recorded in the RC book and in