IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2010 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 5651 of 2010(F) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- NIZAMUDEEN, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.YOUNUS KUNJU, PARAMBIL HOUSE, KANNAMPALLY BHAGOM, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.S.SHANAVAS KHAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. VIKASH FINANCE, RAMLAKSHAN CHAMBERS MUTHIAH MUDALI STREET, SOW CARPET, CHENNAI, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPREITOR. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.5651 of 2010 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the registered owner of a goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-7/E 6712. The vehicle was purchased availing a loan from the third respondent. There was default in repayment of the loan. When the financier re-possessed the vehicle, the petitioner approached the Munsiff's Court, Kayamkulam by filing O.S.No.464/2005 and an order of prohibitory injunction was obtained. Subsequently, the suit has been decreed allowing the plaint claim holding that only an amount of Rs.96,898.50 was due from the petitioner to the financier. 2. Since the original Registration Certificate was with the financier, the petitioner could not pay the tax in respect of the vehicle. Therefore, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.30335/2005 and as per judgment dated 31.10.2005, this Court disposed of the Writ Petition directing the Authority to receive the tax from the petitioner without insisting on production of the original R.C.Book. Writ Appeal wpc No.5651/2010 2 No.613/2006 filed against the said judgment was also dismissed as withdrawn. Subsequently, when the second respondent declined to issue Fitness Certificate to the petitioner also, the petitioner had to approach this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.13259/2006. The said Writ Petition was also allowed directing the Authority to issue Fitness Certificate without insisting on production of the R.C.Book. In view of the above litigation between the financier and the petitioner, the petitioner has not been issued a No Objection Certificate for the renewal of his permit. It is the case of the petitioner that though a request for the issue of a No Objection Certificate was forwarded through the second respondent, the financier has not issued the same so far. He has also not issued any reply to the request. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking the issue of appropriate directions for the grant of renewal of his permit. 3. The petitioner relies on Section 51(7) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1978 which provides that where a financier does not issue any reply to the request for the issue of a No Objection Certificate, the same would be deemed to have been issued. wpc No.5651/2010 3 4. The learned Government Pleader submits that since the financier has not issued the No Objection Certificate and also not issued any reply to the request of the petitioner, it is for the petitioner to submit a declaration as contemplated by Section 51(8) of the Act. If such a declaration is submitted, the Government Pleader assures that the matter would be considered and appropriate orders passed, without delay. 5. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to submit a declaration as contemplated by Section 51(8) of the Motor Vehicles Act within a period of one week from today. On receipt of such declaration, the second respondent shall consider the request of the petitioner for renewal of his permit in respect of his goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-7/E 6712 in accordance with law and shall pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two weeks of receipt of the declaration referred to above. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, Judge css/