Back
2024 Supreme(Mad) 2504
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
Kavitha Anantharamakrishnan - Petitioner
Versus
M. Harikrishnan - Respondent
C.R.P. (NPD) No. 3869 of 2023, C.M.P. No. 23886 of 2023
Decided On : 25-07-2024
Important Points
Subject
Transport Law - Permit Transfer
Act Referred
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT: S.82, S.82(2), S.82(3), S.89, S.89(a)
SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT: S.34
Headnote
(B) Legal heirs under Hindu Succession Act - All legal heirs succeed to the estate; therefore, a 'No Objection Certificate' from all heirs is necessary for permit transfer. (Paras 29-30)
(C) Conditions imposed - Respondent permitted to operate vehicle only upon presentation of suit for declaration of title based on the 'WILL' and monthly maintenance payment to the petitioner until resolution. (Paras 37-38)
(D) Final Decision: Civil Revision Petition disposed, with directions for future proceedings regarding the 'WILL'.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: P. Vijendran
For the Respondents: M. Palani, Amritha Poongodi Dinakaran
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background surrounding the bus permits and heirs. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. legal proceedings concerning permit transfer. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. hearings involving representations from all parties. (Para 11 , 12 , 17) |
| 4. legal heirs' rights and implications of multiple wills discussed. (Para 15) |
| 5. court's analysis on the validity of wills. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. criteria for permit transfer under law. (Para 22 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. statutory compliance for permit transfer upheld against individual claims. (Para 25 , 29) |
| 8. court's interpretation of possession and joint family property. (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 9. conclusion and provision for maintaining family support. (Para 34 , 36 , 39 , 40) |
| 10. conditions for operation of permit pending resolution of the will's validity. (Para 38) |
| 11. disposition of the civil revision petition. (Para 42) |
ORDER :
1. The present Civil Revision Petition arises at the instance of the objector before the Regional Transport Authority, Thiruvarur District.
2. The undisputed facts of the case are that there was one Mahadevan who owned three buses, namely one bus bearing registration No.TN50H 0668, a spare bus bearing registration No.TN50C 5464, and a mini bus bearing registration No.TN Y 7470.
3. The bus bearing registration No.TN50H 0668 was operating between Pattukottai and Thiruthuraipoondi, and the bus bearing registration No.TNY 7470 was operating between Thiruthuraipoondi Bharathiyar Street and Pichankottagam. The Pattukottai to Thiruthuraipoondi permit was valid till 04.04.2023, the spare bus permit was valid till 06.07.2020, and the mini bus permit was valid till 09.11.2020.
4. The said Mahadevan had two sons and four daughters. The 1st son of Mahadevan was one Anantharamakrishnan, who is no more. He left behind as his legal heirs, the civil revision petitioner/his wife and his two children. The 1st respondent/Harikrishnan is the 2nd son of the deceased Mahadevan. The daughters of the deceased Mahadevan are Geetha, Sumathi, Seethalakshmi and Amaravathi.
5. Mahadevan had executed a registered "WILL" on 04.01.2017. He had made provisions with respect to the permit in favour of both his sons. Subsequently, Anantharamakrishnan passed away by committing suicide on 24.07.2017. On the death of his 1st son/Anantharamakrishnan, the 1st respondent/Harikrishnan claims that Mahadevan executed another "WILL" on 22.12.2018. He pleads, by virtue of the second "WILL", what was bequeathed under the 1st "WILL" stood cancelled. Mahadevan passed away on 04.01.2021 leaving behind the aforesaid persons. It is not in dispute that the civil revision petitioner/Kavitha, Anantharamakrishnan and her two children, being the legal heirs of Mahadevan's predeceased son, would be covered under Class 1 of the Hindu Succession Act. On the death of Mahadevan, if not for the "WILL" dated 22.12.2018, all the aforesaid persons would have been entitled to make an application for the transfer of permit in favour of any one of them with the consent of the others.
6. Due to Covid - 19 pandemic, Mahadevan did not take any steps to renew the permit. It is not too far fetched to see that because of Covid - 19, the entire country came to a grinding halt, and so did the transport services in the State. On the death of Mahadevan, which occurred during the height of pandemic, Harikrishnan made an application for transfer of the permit, which stood in the name of Mahadevan, to his name.
7. The foundation for this application is the 2nd "WILL" dated22.12.2018. The Regional Transport Authority at Thiruvarur returned the application, stating that the relevant documents that are necessary to be submitted in terms of Rule 214 of the TAMIL NADU MOTOR VEHICLES RULES , 1989, had not been enclosed. Therefore, he directed the 1st respondent to resubmit the application with the documents as found under the said Rule.
8. Consequent to this return of the application, a Writ Petition came to be filed before this Court in W.P.No.12471 of 2022
