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

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 36062

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Sathish Ninan, J
MURALEEDHARAN, – Appellant
Versus
THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY, – Respondent


Advocates:
I. DINESH MENON

JUDGMENT

[WP(C) Nos.8481/2022, 8491/2022, 8654/2022]

The petitioner purchased three vehicles. He submitted applications seeking for change of class of vehicles as an educational institution bus. Question arose as to whether compliance with the AIS standards as prescribed in Rule 125(C) of the Central Motor Vehicles Act is required.

2. In W.A.No.1678 of 2018 and connected cases, a Division Bench of this Court, interpreting Rule 125C of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules and the applicability of AIS:052 to existing models of vehicles, held, “We have considered the submissions of the learned Government Pleader for the appellants but, we are afraid, we cannot read Rule 125C in the manner suggested by the appellants. A mere perusal of the Rules would indicate that while Rule 125C (1) mandated that only new models of buses with seating capacity of 13 or more passengers excluding driver had to have the body built in accordance with new specifications (AIS:052 (Rev-1) 2008) at the time of presentation for testing and approval for body building, the proviso to the said Rule made the requirement applicable to existing models of such buses as well, on and after 1.4.2015. In either event, the rul

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