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

1963 Supreme(Online)(All) 32

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
B. S. Singh, J
State of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Opposite Parties – Respondent


1. I see no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Court below.

2. It appears that the fitness certificate of the opposite - parties' vehicle was to expire on the 19th January, 1961. As the vehicle was expected to be at Lucknow nearabout 24th January, 1961, for servicing, an application was made to the Regional Transport Authority praying for fixing some date after the 19th of January, 1961, for the examination of the vehicle for obtaining a fresh fitness certificate. It appears that the Technical Inspector of the Reginal Transport Office, Lucknow, in substance allowed the application and directed that the vehicle may be produced for inspection before 9 A.M. on the 24th of January, 1961. Before the vehicle could be produced for inspection, it was checked on the 21st of January, 1961, while it was going from Unnao side towards Kanpur. The fitness certificate was checked and according to the Transport Authorities, it was found that it had expired on the 19th January, 1961. The opposite - parties were prosecuted under S.42/123 of the Motor Vehicles' Act.
It appears that the case got protracted. There was an application for the transfer of the case made by the opposite - partie





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