IMPORTANT POINT
The registered owner of a vehicle is liable for tax unless ownership has been transferred, necessitating a hearing for disputes regarding tax liability.

JUDGMENT :

P.M.Manoj, J.

The writ petition is preferred being aggrieved by the issuance of Ext.P6 notice for the initiation of Revenue Recovery proceedings against the petitioner. Such challenge is on the premise that, during the alleged period of tax arrears, the petitioner was not in custody of the vehicle in question.

2. It is stated, the petitioner is the owner of a Mini lorry bearing registration No. KL-13/B-124. He transferred the vehicle to one Muhamad Rafi for a consideration of Rs.1,20,000/-. On payment of the balance consideration on 01.12.2011, the entire documents with the vehicle were handed over to the said Muhamad Rafi. Thereafter, only on receiving notice from the Sub Inspector of Police, Payyannur, the petitioner came to know that the lorry was seized on 18.03.2012 while it was involved in the sand mining activity. In the notice, the petitioner was directed to produce the R.C book of the vehicle. Thereafter, a further notice was also issued by the Sub Divisional Magistrate. The petitioner appeared before the Sub Divisional Magistrate and filed a statement contending that he had already transferred the vehicle and hence, he may be exempted from further proceedings. Even thereafter, it was informed by the 1st respondent to the petitioner that the tax from 01.01.2012 to 31.03.2015 is due and in failure of such payment, revenue recovery proceedings will be initiated as per Ext.P6 notice.

3. The petitioner challenges the same on the background that he had transferred the vehicle to one Muhammed Rafi on 01.12.2011 itself and thereby he is not responsible for such payment of tax for the alleged period between 01.01.2012 to 31.03.2015. In support of his contention, the petitioner relies on the provisions of Section 9(1) of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act'). In sub section (1) of Section 9 it is stated that:

“If the tax leviable in respect of any motor vehicle remains unpaid by any person liable for the payment thereof and such person before the payment of the tax has transferred the ownership of such vehicle or has caused to be in possession or control of such vehicle, the person to whom the ownership of the vehicle has been transferred or the person who has possession or control of such vehicle shall be liable to pay the said tax.”

4. It is further contended that as per Circular No. 31/89 of the Transport Commissioner dated 20.12.1989, it is clarified that the tax liability remains with the owner in whose name the vehicle stands registered. Circular stipulates that, in case of disputes, notice of hearing date shall be given to the interested parties by the adjudicating authority fixing a specific date and time. All the parties in dispute shall be heard simultaneously so that the contentions of one party can be countered or clarified by the other. It is further clarified that if the possession of the vehicle has been admittedly changed by the buyer, steps may be taken for realisation of the arrears from the possessor.

5. In the case on hand, it is contended by the petitioner that he had transferred the vehicle to a third person as per Ext.P1 sale deed, thereby the respondents cannot recover the tax from the petitioner alone. Respondents will have to issue notice to the purchaser of the vehicle as well. It is further contended that as per Ext.P4, it was intimated to the Sub Divisional Magistrate that the entire documents pertains to vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-13/B-124 have been transferred to the purchaser, one Muhammed Rafi.

6. Moreover, it is stated that the issue involved in this case is covered by the decision rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in NPR Finance Ltd. V. State of Kerala [2002 (1) KLT 591]. As per Ext.P1 the petitioner sold his vehicle and it is evident from Ext.P4 statement submitted before the Sub Divisional Magistrate that pursuant to issuance of notice as per Ext.P3, he had sold the vehicle to one Muhammed Rafi, Thayathukallummal House. Therefore, the respondents are