IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9364 of 2009 AMRENDRA KISHOR @ MUNNA SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 02/ 06.08.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 11.01.2008 passed in Certificate Proceeding Case No. 102 of 2006-2007 under Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914. A certificate was drawn against respondent no. 5, being the owner of truck no. BR 22 – 8957. The certificate proceeding was for a sum of Rs.2,50,506/- for non-payment of vehicle tax on 28.12.2006. Respondent no. 5 appeared before the Certificate Officer and had filed an affidavit stating therein that he had sold the Truck No. BR 22 – 8957 to the petitioner on 09.08.2001 and as such he was not liable to pay the tax. The Certificate Officer, as such, issued notice to the petitioner who appeared on 20.09.2007 through an Advocate on 14.11.2007. Petitioner filed show cause in the certificate proceeding case no. 102 of 2006-2007. He stated in his reply show cause that he never purchased the 2 aforesaid truck from respondent no. 5 and copy of show cause dated 14.11.2007 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – 2. Learned counsel submits that without considering the submission of the petitioner and without examining the relevant materials, the Certificate Officer has passed the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that it is the respondent no. 5 who had paid the vehicle tax of aforesaid truck for the period 01.02.2002 to 30.04.2002 for Rs.1522 and Rs.1455, a copy of the challans are annexed as Annexure 4 & 4/1. The challan bears the name of respondent no. 5. The petitioner has also filed a Title Suit No.101 2008 alleging therein that respondent no. 5 have used forged and fabricated documents for getting aforesaid order. The petitioner has also filed an injunction petition under order 2 of the C.P.C. Learned counsel submits that the Certificate Officer has not considered the fact that aforesaid motor vehicle stands registered in the name of respondent no. 5. After hearing the counsel for the parties, this Court remits the matter back to the Certificate Officer for 3 fresh hearing of the matter after giving notice to all concerned. The warrant issued against the petitioner as such is also kept in abeyance till the fresh decision by the Certificate Officer. This application is accordingly disposed of. kundan (S. P. Singh, J.)