Regular Second Appeal No. 528 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No. 528 of 2010 Date of decision : August 10, 2010 Kiran Gupta ....Appellant versus The Licencing Officer-cum-Tehsildar and another ....Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Plaintiff Kiran Gupta having failed in both the courts below has filed the instant second appeal. Plaintiff's father-in-law Sugan Chand was holding hand cart licence dated 5.11.1990 issued by respondents (Authorities of Union Territory, Chandigarh). As required by the defendants, Sugan Chand also deposited Rs 3000/- vide bank draft dated 25.3.1991. Sugan Chand executed Will dated 5.11.1998 in favour of the plaintiff bequeathing right in the shop that was to be allotted to him by Chandigarh Administration and also bequeathing right to get the licence transferred in favour of the plaintiff. Sugan Chand has since died on 17.1.1999. On the basis of the Will, the plaintiff moved application dated 7.2.2000 to the Regular Second Appeal No. 528 of 2010 -2- defendants/respondents for transfer of the licence in her favour. The defendants rejected the plaintiff's application vide letter dated 19.9.2001. Appeal preferred by the plaintiff against the said order under the relevant Bye-laws has also since been dismissed vide order dated 16.3.2004. The plaintiff filed suit seeking declaration and mandatory injunction that the plaintiff is entitled to seek transfer of the aforesaid hand cart licence in her favour in view of Will executed in her favour by her father-in-law holder of the said licence. Defendants, inter alia, pleaded that under the Chandigarh Hand Cart Control and Regulation Bye-laws, 1989 (in short, the Bye-laws), only son or widow of the deceased licence holder, fulfilling necessary conditions, can apply for transfer of hand cart licence. Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh vide judgment and decree dated 5.8.2006 dismissed the plaintiff's suit. First appeal preferred by the plaintiff stands dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh vide judgment and decree dated 20.8.2009. Feeling aggrieved, the plaintiff has preferred the instant second appeal. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that Will is not transfer and therefore, in view of the Will, the plaintiff is entitled to seek transfer of the licence in her favour. Reliance in support of this contention has been placed on S. Rathinam @ Kuppamuthu and Ors. v. L.S. Mariappan and Ors., AIR 2007 SC 2134. The contention is untenable and devoid of any substance. Under Bye-laws, the licence is not Regular Second Appeal No. 528 of 2010 -3- transferable. Consequently, licence holder has no right to transfer the same. It is correct that in the instant case, the licence holder has not alienated the licence by way of sale. However, Bye-laws also provide that on the death of licence holder, the licence can be transferred only in favour of son or widow of the deceased licence holder subject to fulfillment of necessary conditions. In the instant case, plaintiff seeks transfer of the licence in her favour on the basis of Will. However, the plaintiff is daughter-in-law of the deceased licence holder. Consequently, in view of specific provision in the Bye-laws, the licence cannot be transferred in favour of the plaintiff as licence can be transferred only in favour of the widow or son of the licence holder. The plaintiff is bound by the Bye-laws under which the licence was issued. Consequently, there is no infirmity in the finding of the courts below that plaintiff is not entitled to seek transfer of the licence in her favour. Orders of the defendants rejecting prayer of the plaintiff for transfer of the licence in her favour are also justified and do not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. Legality or validity of the Bye- laws has not been challenged in the suit. No question of law much less substantial question of law arises for determination in the instant second appeal. The appeal is completely without any merit and is accordingly dismissed. ( L.N. Mittal ) August 10, 2010 Judge 'dalbir'