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

2010 Supreme(Raj) 965

M.N.BHANDARI
Lal Chand Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
Sanjay Mahrishi, for Petitioner

JUDGMENT

Hon'ble BHANDARI, J.—By this writ petition, a challenge has been made to order dated 11.8.2010 with a further prayer that respondents be restrained to initiate action pursuant to aforesaid order.

2. It is a case where a vehicle bearing No. RJ-17-U-0275 was found involved and seized for an offence under the provisions of the Rajasthan Excise Act. Petitioner was found to be registered owner of the said vehicle, thus a letter was issued by respondent - Department on 11.8.2010 requesting Vigilance Cell of the Excise Department for filing challan against petitioner. On receipt of copy of aforesaid letter, petitioner sent a reply stating that vehicle has already been sold to one Shri Ashish Harjani on consideration. Thus, has no where related to the said vehicle now. After filing reply, when nothing come out either in favour of petitioner or against him, this writ petition has been filed to challenge letter dated 11.8.2010.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that letter dated 11.8.2010 has been issued in ignorance of the definition of 'owner' as provided under Section 2(30) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act of 1988'). According to him, definition of 'owner










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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top