IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 26TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3045 of 2005(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ B.GOPINATHAN NAIR, S/O.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, THEKEVEEDU, VELIYANNOOR P.O. VELLENADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.K.K.RAZIA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THEJOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, (TAXATION OFFICER), NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, [RR] NEDUMANGAD. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARYANADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. BIBU.P. S/O.PONNAYYAN, PRASANNA VILASAM, OTTASEKHARAMANGALAM, KEZHAROOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM R1 TO R4 BY G.P. SMT. SMITHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 15.9.1999 BETWEEN PETITIONER AND THE FIFTH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 16.6.99 WITH RESPECT TO SENDING OF INFORMATION TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 30.10.2000 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 3045 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of arrears of motor vehicle tax due in respect of Mahindra Mini bus bearing registration No. KL-6/1988. The arrears is for the period commencing from .1.4.1999 to 31.12.1999. Even though petitioner has a case that vehicle was sold to the fifth respondent, notice sent to him was returned with the endorsement "unclaimed". Petitioner has produced a postal acknowledgement, namely, Ext.P2, which according to the petitioner is acknowledgement of intimation sent to RTO about sale of vehicle. Petitioner has not produced form No. 29 prescribed under Rule 55 of the Motor Vehicles Rules about sale of vehicle. In any case since arrears is only for the period of 1999, it is a matter to be seen whether tax was paid for later years also. W.P. is therefore disposed of with direction to the second respondent to verify the records and see whether petitioner has intimated the transfer in accordance with rules and if not to intimate the third respondent to 2 proceed against the petitioner for recovery as he is liable under Section 3(3) of the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act. However, if the vehicle is transferred to fifth respondent and if any tax is paid for later years, there will be direction to the second respondent to intimate the same to the third respondent who is directed to proceed for recovery against the fifth respondent. Petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3