IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 13TH JUNE 2008 / 23RD JYAISHTA 1930 W.P.(C).No. 17715 of 2008(H) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: --------------- JOSEPH KURIAN, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.KURIAN, KANJIKKAMUNDAKATH HOUSE, PERAMANGALAM DESOM, PERAMANGALAM VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.SAJEEV RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, THRISSUR. 3. FAISAL, S/O.MUTHU, THERUVATH HOUSE, PANNITHADAM DESOM, CHIRAMANANGAD VILLAGE, TALAPPILLY TALUK. 4. SREENIVASAN, CHALATHOORVALAPPIL HOUSE, ANJUR P.O., THRISSUR - 680 549. 5. THE MANAGER, ICICI BANK LTD., IVTH FLOOR, EMGEE SQUARE, M.G.ROAD, NEAR PADMA JUNCTION, COCHIN. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SMT. K.R. DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 17715 OF 2008 H ==================== Dated this the 13th day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that he had purchased a car, availing of hire purchase from the 5th respondent. It is stated that the vehicle was entrusted to the 3rd respondent on rental basis. According to him, the 3rd respondent misused the vehicle and the registration certificate which was also in his custody. It is stated by the petitioner that thereupon he filed a complaint on this and a crime has been registered against the 3rd respondent. Petitioner submits that as the 3rd respondent did not return the registration certificate, he had applied for a duplicate Registration Certificate and that the same was declined by the Registering Authority stating that going by the records, the 4th respondent was the registered owner. 2. It is contended that even if any such action has been effected that has been done without complying with the procedural requirements of Section 51 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. According to him, neither he nor the financier had agreed for such a change of ownership. Thereupon the petitioner filed Ext.P12 complaint before the 1st respondent and in this WPC 17715/08 :2 : writ petition what is sought for by the petitioner is that the 1st respondent should take note of Ext.P12 and pass orders thereon. 3. In the facts as stated by the petitioner, I feel if Ext.P12 has been received, the 1st respondent should take necessary action thereon. 4. Accordingly, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the 1st respondent shall take note of Ext.P12, consider the same with notice to the petitioner and respondents 3 to 5 and pass orders thereon. This the 1st respondent shall do, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp