IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2008 / 1ST SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 24828 of 2006(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- SHAMEER, S/O.LATE SULAIMAN KUNJU, NAZEEMA MANZIL, PATTARUMUKKU, UMAYANALOOR,KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA MOTOR WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, KOLLAM. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (R.R), TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM. 3. R.N. SHIBU, S/O.P.NARENDRAN, SIMI DALE, KARAMCODE P.O., KOLLAM. ADDL.R4. C.RAVI, S/O.K.KANDAN KORAN, AGED 40 YEARS, THANKAYI P.O, TRIKKARIPUR, KASARGOD. (ADDL.R4 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT 24/8/2007 IN IA 11659/07) BY ADV. SRI.B.SURESH KUMAR FOR R3 SRI.A.K.ABDUL AZEEZ FOR ADDL.R4 SRI.K.HARILAL, SC FOR R1 GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.24828/06 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE TREATMENT RECORDS OF THE PETITIONER'S FATHER. EXT.P2: THE TRUE COPY OF THE RC PARTICULARS OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REG.NO.KL 2 E 6426. EXT.P3: THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL DETERMINATION ORDER NO.B5/EQ-917/01-02 DT 1/1/03 FOR THE YEAR 2001-02 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3(a): THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL DETERMINATION ORDER NO.B5- EQ-917/02-03 DT 30/4/2004 FOR THE YEAR 2002-03 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3(b): THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL DETERMINATION ORDER NO.B5/EQ-917/03-04 DT 11/7/05 FOR THE YEAR 2003-04 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDNET. EXTS.OF R3 EXT.R3(a): A TRUE COPY OF the REGISTRATION PARTICULARS DT 18/11/2006 OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL2E 6426 ISSUED BY THE RTO, KOLLAM. EXT.R3(b): A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PARTICULARS OF THE DRIVING LICENCE DT NIL OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 24828 OF 2006 E ==================== Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T Exts. P3, P3(a) and P3(b) final determination orders issued under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Act and the scheme framed are sought to be challenged. Writ petitioner's deceased father Sri.Sulaiman Kunju was the registered owner of a contract carriage, No.KL 2 E 6426. After prolonged ailment, his father passed away on 13/8/2006. 2. Much prior to his death, his father had transferred the vehicle to the 3rd respondent by Ext.P2 and registration was also transferred w.e.f. 2/7/2001. Long thereafter, when he was informed that recovery proceedings are being initiated against him, petitioner came to know that final determination orders were passed against his father for the period 2001-04 by Exts.P3, P3(a) and P3(b). It is thereupon, this writ petition was filed disputing his liability and challenging the aforesaid final determination orders. 3. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit where he admits that the vehicle in question was purchased by him on the strength of Ext P2. It is also stated that he transferred the vehicle to the additional WPC 24828/06 :2 : 4th respondent w.e.f. 16/11/2002 and the registration was transferred on 4/12/2002. The 3rd respondent admits the liability for the period he was the registered owner of the vehicle and also undertakes that he will pay the amount, if any, that is still due for that period. Petitioner also admits that he is willing to discharge the liability, if any of his father for the period upto 2/7/2001, when he sold the vehicle to the 3rd respondent. When these facts were brought to the notice of this court, by order dated 16/1/2007, the petitioner and the 3rd respondent were directed to remit Rs.4,000/- and Rs.10,000/- respectively and these amounts have been paid by both of them, which is not in dispute also. 4. Subsequently, taking note of the transfer in favour of the 4th respondent, this court also passed order dated 24th of August, 2007 directing the 4th respondent to pay the welfare fund dues from the date on which he purchased the vehicle. It is now submitted that the 4th respondent has not paid the amount in pursuance to the said order. 5. Technically, the counsel for the Welfare Fund Board is right in contending that in view of the fact that Exts.P3, P3(a) and P3(b) final determination orders have become final against the petitioner's deceased father, the petitioner is liable to make payment of the amount. But still, WPC 24828/06 :3 : the fact remains that the petitioner's father had transferred the vehicle to the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent had again transferred the vehicle to the additional 4th respondent and these facts are seen admitted in the pleadings. It is also admitted that necessary changes were also made in the registration certificates as well. If that be so, I do not think that there is any justification on the part of the Welfare Fund Board to insist that the petitioner himself should pay the entire amount, ignoring the fact that the vehicle in question has been transferred in favour fo the 3rd respondent and thereafter to the 4th respondent. 6. Having regard to the above facts and also taking note of the partial payments made by the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions. i) That for the period upto 2/7/2001 and 4/12/2002, when the petitioner's father and the 3rd respondent were the registered owners of the vehicle, after giving credit to the payments that they have already made, if any further sum is due, it will be open to the 1st respondent to demand the same from the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. ii) For the amount due to the Welfare Fund for the period subsequent to 4/12/2002, in view of the fact that the additional 4th WPC 24828/06 :4 : respondent was the registered owner for that period, the 1st respondent may initiate necessary action for realising the amount from the additional 4th respondent. iii) It is directed that if payment is made as above by the petitioner, further recovery proceedings against him will not be initiated. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp