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

2019 Supreme(Ker) 521

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S.V. BHATTI, J.
Sabu Johny - Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala - Respondent
WP(C).No.1824, 11585, 20193, 21595, 24482, 25170, 29183, 33231 of 2018
Decided on : 16-07-2019

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : SRI BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, SRI.PAUL JACOB (P), SRI.LEO LUKOSE, Adv.
For the Respondent: SR. ADV. N VENKITARAMAN ADV. AKHIL SURESH SPL.G.P. SRI.P.RAVINDRANATH SPL. G.P. SRI P.N. SANTHOSH KUMAR DR.THUSHARA JAMES, GP SMT.M.M. JASMIN, ADV

IMPORTANT POINTS
• The registration certificate issued by the Assistant Registering Authority, Puducherry as on today is valid and there cannot be two registrations for a vehicle with same engine number, chasis number etc. unless and until the registration already held by the vehicle is cancelled under Section 55(5) of the Act.
• A non-State registered/non-transport vehicle owner if keeps vehicle in Kerala beyond the permitted period i.e., stays beyond thirty days, then the incidence of tax under Section 3(6) of Act 1976 is attracted and the respondents are entitled to enquire into levy and recover the vehicle tax in accordance with Anneuxre III. Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1976 permits plying vehicles without the incidence of tax for a period of thirty days from the date of entry into State.
• On receipt of information the registering authority -Puducherry puts the owner on notice and thereafter passes orders cancelling the registration. The said approach is track-1 approach under Act, 1988 available to respondents and tract-II is independent, arising under Section 3(6) of Act 1976, where for keeping the vehicles beyond thirty days, vehicle tax as per Annexure III can be levied and collected.


Headnote:

Constitution of India -Entries 57 and 35 of List II and III of Seventh Schedule of Constitution of India-The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988-The Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989-The Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 -The Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules- The vehicle, if is kept in the State of Kerala beyond thirty days the incidence under Section 3(6) read with Schedule and Annexure III is attracted and vehicle tax payable under Section 3(6) of Act 1976.

Statement of facts:

The vehicle registered at Puduchery using fabricated address with an intention to use at Kerala State permanently by evading road tax which is comparatively higher at Kerala-Liable to remit tax as per section 3 of Kerala Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1976 - In contravention of Sections 40 and 49 of Act 1988, registered the vehicle in Puducherry and plying the vehicle in State of Kerala particularly without paying vehicle tax.

Finding of the case:

(a) Section 3(6) of Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 is within the competence of State legislature and Section 3(6) is not in any manner repugnant to Chapter IV of Motor Vehicles' Act, 1988 or ultra viresAct 1976. Section 3(6) therefore is valid and legal.

(b) The registration of a non-transport vehicle and payment of registration fee under Act 1988 or payment of motor vehicle tax under a State legislature continues to be valid so long as the vehicle is kept and used in the State in which it is registered. These vehicles if enter State of Kerala and stay beyond the period stipulated by the State enactment, the vehicle is required to pay vehicle tax as per Section 3(6) read with Annexure III of Schedule of Act 1976.

(c) The impugned orders calling upon the petitioners to register the subject vehicles in State of Kerala and pay life tax are set aside as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice, the matters are restored to the file of respective Regional Transport Officer/respondents for consideration and disposal by keeping in view the principles stated supra.

(d) The writ petitions filed challenging show cause notices are given four weeks' time from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment to file objections against proposed tax levy and are entitled to show that, firstly, the vehicle is not kept for use in State of Kerala beyond thirty days and, alternatively, vehicle is not at all used or kept for use in State of Kerala. The objection raised against proposed action is examined in detail and orders as are warranted by the circumstances of the case are passed. Respondents keeping in view the scope, character and purpose of incidence of vehicle tax, consider the objections and pass detailed orders, in all the matters now restored to file as well as where time is granted for filing objections to show cause notice.

Result: Disposed of

JUDGMENT :

[WP(C)33231/2018, WP(C).1824/2018, WP(C).11585/2018, WP(C).20193/2018, WP(C).21595/2018, WP(C).24482/2018, WP(C).25170/2018, WP(C).29183/2018]

Heard Sri Bechu Kurian, the learned Senior Counsel and Sri M.Ajay, Sri Bhagavat Singh, Dr.Sebastian Champappilly the learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. N.Venkitaraman, the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the parties, keeping in view the similarity of writ prayers in this batch of writ petitions, have treated WP(C) Nos.33231, 29183, 24482, 25170 and 1824 of 2018 as the lead Writ Petitions, referred to the pleadings and documents in these writ petitions and canvassed their respective prayers. The learned counsel Sri Bechu Kurian, appearing for the petitioner in WPC No.33231 of 2018, Mr.M.Ajay, Mr.Bhagavath Singh and Dr.Sebastian Champappilly, the learned counsel for the petitioner in WPC No.29183 of 2018 and other two cases have made detailed arguments, and the other counsel appearing in companion writ petitions have adopted their arguments. The counsel have further stated that the consideration and reference to pleadings in the writ petitions referred suprawould be sufficient for disposing of WPC No.33231 of 2018 and the companion batch of writ petitions.

3. In the instant batch of writ petitions, the issues for consideration arise under Entries 57 and 35 of List II and III of Seventh Schedule of Constitution of India, the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘Act 1988’), The Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (for short ‘Rules 1989’), the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 (for short ‘Act 1976’) and the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules (for short the 'Rules 1989').

WP(C) No.29183 of 2018

4. Adattil Muhammed/the petitioner prays for a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P9 notice dated 4.12.2017, Ext.P11 Circular dated 22.11.2017 and Ext.P14 order dated 6.8.2018 as illegal and unconstitutional. The petitioner prays for the relief of declaration that vehicle bearing No.PY-01/CR 50 owned by the petitioner under Ext.P8 Registration Certificate is not liable for tax under Section 3 of Act 1976 and also that Vehicle No.PY-01/CR 50 is not required to be registered in the State of Kerala under Chapter IV of Act 1988. The petitioner prays for a mandamus restraining respondents 2 to 4 in the writ petition and all subordinate officers of Transport and Police Departments from interfering with the plying of Vehicle PY-01/CR 50 in State of Kerala on the ground that the vehicle tax allegedly due and payable under Act 1976 is not paid or remitted to State of Kerala.

4.1 The petitioner is the Managing partner of a partnership firm “M/s Classy, The Antique Designed Furniture, Branch Office at No.105, 1 E.C.R. Main Road, Chinnakalapet, Puducherry PIN 605014.” (for short 'the firm'). The petitioner claims that the firm has a branch office in Puducherry. The firm for running the branch office, under Ext.P1 lease deed dated 8.9.2017 had taken on lease a shop bearing No.627, shop room Nos.2 and 3, Vazhudavur Road, Puducherry. The registration certificate issued under Shops and Establishment Act is evidenced as Ext.P2. The petitioner purchased a BMW motor car from M/s Platino Classic Limited, Kochi with billing address as Classy, The Antique Designed Furniture, (Room No.627, Shop Nos.2 and 3), Vazhudavur Road, Puducherry, Puduchery, the invoice is marked as Ext.P3. The vehicle covered by Ext.P3 is registered by the Assistant Registering Authority, Puducherry as PY-01 CR 50 under Ext.P4. The petitioner, compelled by business planning and to keep pace with progressing business, shifted the place of business of the firm to premises bearing No.105, ECR Main Road, Chinnakalapet, Puducherry. The petitioner received Ext.P9 notice from the office of fifth responden






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 Back to top