IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 26TH DECEMBER 2008 / 5TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 38090 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ SHAJI PAUL, H.NO.48/1636, PARAMEL HOUSE, ELAMAKKARA P.O., KOCHI-26. BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DEPUTY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, KOCHI. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPT. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.SREEKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 38090 OF 2008 (H) ==================== Dated this the 26th day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the registered owner of a light motor vehicle bearing Regn.No.KL-07 BJ 1439. The vehicle is having an open body and the petitioner wanted to have the body converted into a covered one. Thereupon, petitioner made Ext.P2 application to the 1st respondent, seeking his permission and that was rejected by Ext.P3 on the ground that any such modification will offend Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is challenging Ext.P3, the writ petition is filed. 2. In my view, in a case like this, Section 52 is not attracted. This issue is covered by Ext.P4 judgment of this Court in WP(C) No.14540/07. In the light of Ext.P4 judgment, Ext.P3 order is unsustainable and therefore it is quashed. Accordingly, 1st respondent is directed to pass orders on Ext.P2 application in the light of Ext.P4 judgment, a copy of which will be produced by the petitioner. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp