Petitioner's non-ownership does not preclude consideration of permit applications under existing legal principles.

JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

“i.Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or such other writ order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to take Exhibit P9 application for renewal of Exhibit P2 permit submitted by the petitioner herein to file and pass orders thereon taking into account the law laid down in Raveendran v. RTO reported in 1995 (1) KLT 126 uninfluenced by the fact that petitioner herein is not the registered owner of the vehicle covered by Exhibit P2 permit.

ii.Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or such other writ order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to take Exhibit P10 application for temporary permit submitted by the petitioner herein to file and issue temporary permit under S. 87 (1) (d) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 taking into account the dictum laid down in Raveendran v. RTO reported in 1995 (1) KLT 126 uninfluenced by the fact that petitioner herein is not the registered owner of the vehicle.

iii.Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or such other writ order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to take Exhibit P11 application for renewal of the certificate of fitness of the vehicle covered by Exhibit p1 certificate of registration and renew the certificate of fitness uninfluenced by the fact that petitioner herein is not the registered owner of the vehicle. iv.Issue such other writ, order or direction as this Honorable Court may deem fit and appropriate in the facts of the case. v.Dispense with the English translations of the vernacular Exhibits unless otherwise ordered by this Honorable Court.”

2. This Court had passed an interim order on 10.11.2025 directing respondents 1 and 2 to consider the application for a temporary permit pending the renewal application submitted by the petitioner. It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner that a temporary permit has been issued, which is valid till 25.03.2026. Another prayer sought by the petitioner is for a direction to consider the renewal application based on the possession of the vehicle.

3. In such circumstances, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on the application with notice to the petitioner and the 3^rd respondent and also taking note of the orders passed by the Civil Court in the pending suit between the parties. It will be open to the parties to produce such materials before the 1st respondent, which shall be adverted to while deciding as directed above. The decision shall be taken within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that the decision to be taken by the 1st respondent will be subject to the final orders to be passed in the civil suit pending between the parties.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.