Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 27241
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J
MUHAMMED. U. – Appellant
Versus
THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VADAKARA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 5397 OF 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.PRASAD CHANDRAN
For the Respondents: SRI.P.S. APPU, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
Pending civil suit by previous owner justifies notice before permit transfer despite blacklisting.
Headnote:The petitioner challenged the blacklisting of his stage carriage KL-59/G-2952 in the Parivahan Portal due to a pending civil suit by the previous owner, preventing permit transfer under relevant Motor Vehicles Act provisions. The court noted the factual objection from the prior owner. The court directed consideration of the transfer request. The key issue was whether blacklisting justified denying permit transfer. The court reasoned that pending litigation by the previous owner warranted notice before finalizing transfer, emphasizing procedural fairness. The court directed the second respondent to consider the permit transfer request with notice to the petitioner and previous owner within one month, disposing of the writ petition.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenges blacklisting due to pending owner suit. (Para 1) |
| 2. permit transfer blocked by ownership objection. (Para 2) |
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the black listing of his stage carriage bearing Registration No.KL- 59/G-2952 in the Parivahan Portal. The petitioner states that the vehicle has been black listed for the reason that there is a case pending before the Munsiff Court, Payyannur as O.S.No.80 of 2020 filed by one Vasantha, the previous owner. The petitioner further states that due to black listing, the 2nd respondent is not allowing the transfer of the permit granted as per Ext.P2. Accordingly, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for the following reliefs:
“i) Issue a writ of Certiorari calling for the records leading to the case and quash Exhibit P4 order passed by the 3rd respondent;
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order directing the 3rd respondent to delete the endorsement by Exhibit P4 order in vahan site in respect of the petitioner’s Stage carriage KL- 59/G-2952 at the earliest in the interest of justice forthwith;
iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order directing the 2nd respondent to allow the transfer of permit granted as per Exhibit P2 in respect of the petitioner’s goods carriage KL-59/G-2952 in the interest of justice forthwith or within a time limit as fixed by this Hon’ble court; “
2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent wherein it is stated that the transfer of permit is not endorsed due to an objection against the transfer of ownership of the vehicle from the previous owner.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the request of the petitioner for transfer of permit granted as per Ext.P2 with notice to the petitioner and the aforesaid Vasantha as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of.
