IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 29TH MAY 2008 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 22487 of 2004(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI, PANTHAPLAVIL PADINJATTATHIL, NEDUMONKAVU, KAREEPARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, KERALA STATE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.. 2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDA R (R.R.), TALUK OFFOCE, KOTTARAKKARA. 4. KUMARI SANTHA, D/O.OMANA NEELANKANTA PILLAI, NEDUVILA VEEDU, KURUMANDEL CHERRY, PARAVOOR, KOLLAM. R1 TO R3 BY G.P. SMT.SMITHA SUKUMARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: TRUE COPY OF RC PARTICULARS OF 1987 MODEL ASHOK LEYLAND CONTRACT CARRIAGE BEARING REG. NO.KCT-72. P2: TRUE COPY OF SALE AGREEMENT DT.8.11.98. P3: TRUE COPY OF SALE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND R4 DT.19.3.99. P4: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DT.15.6.02 ISSUED BY R2. P5: TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DT.6.11.03 ISSUED BY R2. P6: .DO. DT.8.1.04 ISSUED BY R3 TO THE PETITIONER. P7: TRUE COPY OR ORDER ISSUED BY DEPUTY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER. P8: TRUE COPY OF REVISION NO.16/04 FILED BY PETIITONER BEFORE R1 DT.23.6.04. P9: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT.2.7.2004 ISSUED BY R1 TO THE PETITIONER. P10: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT.30.9.04 ISSUED BY R1. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... W.P.(C) No.22487 of 2004 .................................................................... Dated this the 29th day of May, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of arrears of motor vehicle tax in respect of a contract carriage which was owned by the petitioner but later sold to the 4th respondent. The petitioner as a registered owner is liable to pay tax as provided under Section 3(3) of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act. However, if vehicle is there, it should be attached and sold. This court had also issued direction to respondents 2 and 3 to recover the arrears of tax from 4th respondent who is said to be the purchaser. However, Government Pleader submitted that 4th respondent has denied purchase of vehicle from the petitioner. The petitioner has not produced acknowledged copy of Form prescribed under Section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act towards proof of transfer. In the circumstances, W.P. is disposed of directing the petitioner to furnish details of place of garage of the vehicle to the second respondent and if details are furnished, second respondent will with the assistance of Police seize the vehicle and sell it in recovery proceedings. However, if vehicle is not recovered for sale within two months from now, recovery can be made from 2 the petitioner as petitioner was the registered owner. It is for the petitioner to settle petitioner's dispute with the purchaser in civil court. The W.P. is disposed of as above. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms