IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 19TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 36420 of 2005(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.V.BALAKRISHNAN, AJITHA NIKETHAN, VADAKKUMBAD P.O., ERANHOLI. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR(REVENUE RECOVERY), THALASSERY. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ERANHOLI. 3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KANNUR. 4. P.VAMADEVAN, CHATHOTH HOUSE, PATHIRIYAD, MAMBRAM, THALASSERY. R1 TO R3 BY G.P. SRI. N. SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND FOURTH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NSOTICE UNDER SECTION 7 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 11.6.2004 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 24.9.2004 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE R.C. BOOK OF PETITIONER'S VEHICLE NO. KRZ 3256 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 36420 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner's case is that he is not liable for arrears of tax due for the vehicle bearing registration No. KRZ 3256. According to the petitioner, since there was no permit, petitioner paid the tax at NTV rate for the period from 1.4.1997 to 30.9.1997. However, Government Pleader submitted that besides demand for this period, there is tax arrears due for the period from 1.10.1997 to 20.1.2000 when the petitioner sold the vehicle under agreement of sale to the fourth respondent. It is not known whether petitioner has intimated the sale in Form No.29 to the RTO. In any case, since details are not furnished, O.P. is disposed of directing the third respondent to verify the records pertaining to tax and issue notice to the petitioner and fourth respondent, hear their objections and pass orders and send communication to the first respondent, whether it be against petitioner or fourth respondent. RTO is directed to pass fresh orders within two months from now. Interim orders passed by this Court will continue 2 for another three months and recovery thereafter will be based on fresh orders to be issued by RTO. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3