Back
D. K. SINGH
RDS PROJECT LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY SECRETARY, NEW DELHI – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
D.K. SINGH, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who has purchased the cold recyclers and soil stabilizer machine for executing the road work on NH-66 against the direction for registration of the said equipment as a motor vehicle under the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and Rules made thereunder (‘the Act’ for short). The petitioner has also challenged the challan in Ext.P6 issued by the 3rd respondent for not registering the said equipment as a motor vehicle by the petitioner.
2. The petitioner company has been awarded the work for the execution of six laning of 30 km between Kadambattukonam-Kazhakkuttam Junction Section of NH-66 in Thiruvananthapuram under the Bharatmala Pariyojana project. The said project is under the control and supervision of the Government of India, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi. The petitioner has entered into an agreement dated 19.05.2022 with the National Highway Authority of India, to execute the said work.
3. In connection with the work, the petitioner has purchased a WRITGEN Cold recycler Model WR 240 along with all its accessories to be used for soil treatment, consolidation in road
Cold recyclers and soil stabilizers are classified as construction equipment, not motor vehicles, and thus do not require registration under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Machines structurally adaptable for road use are motor vehicles, requiring registration and tax under relevant acts, regardless of exclusive use within private premises.
Heavy Earth Moving Machinery, intended for off-road use only, do not qualify as 'motor vehicles' under the Motor Vehicles Act and are not subject to taxation, as confirmed by expert certifications.
Articles used in the manufacturing process are eligible for concessional tax under Section 8(3)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and Rule 13 of the Central Sales Tax (R & T) Act, 1957.
The court upheld that the dozer involved in the accident does not meet the definition of 'motor vehicle', thus rendering the claim for compensation unmaintainable.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the term 'portable' in relation to hot mix plants and the requirement for obtaining permission under Rule 68 of the Kerala Pa....
Tender rejection upheld as petitioner failed to provide sufficient proof of machinery ownership as mandated, highlighting strict adherence to bid requirements.
The court affirmed that a Poklen construction vehicle qualifies as a 'motor vehicle' under the Motor Vehicles Act, ensuring liability is upheld for third-party claims.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
