IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2010 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36184 of 2010(W) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ TELMA,W/O.PREMAN,RATHEESH BHAVAN, KOIPPATTUCHERRY,CHATHANNOOR PO, MEENAD VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADVS. SRI.B.MOHANLAL, SRI.SAIJU S. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, COLLECTORATE,KOLLAM 691 013. 2. THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KOTTARAKKARA,PULAMON PO, KOTTARAKKARA,KOLLAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 36184 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner has purchased a Bajaj Autorikshaw bearing registration No.KL-02 R 2680. Ext.P1 is the Sale Deed dated 16.10.2008. According to the petitioner, he had paid the entire hire purchase instalments to the financier and then, submitted an application before the second respondent for transfer of ownership of the said vehicle along with No Objection certificate from the financier for cancellation of hypothecation. Pursuant to the receipt of the application, the second respondent issued Ext.P2 communication dated 14.6.2009 to the financier. However, the financier did not respond to Ext.P2 despite the lapse of more than an year. The grievance of the petitioner is that after the issuance of Ext.P2, no further steps have been taken by the second respondent on the application submitted by the petitioner for transfer of ownership. The fact that the petitioner has filed an application and has produced Form No.35 for cancellation of hypothecation agreement with NOC for cancelling the hypothecation agreement is evident from Ext.P2 itself. Evidently, the second respondent has already complied with the statutory formalities and W.P.(C) NO.36184/2010 2 therefore, the second respondent has to pass appropriate orders on the application submitted by the petitioner for the purpose for which the application referred to in Ext.P2 has been made. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass orders on the application submitted by the petitioner based on which Ext.P2 was issued to the financier expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.36184/2010 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.36184/2010 4