IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2010 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 37028 of 2010(C) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------- AVIJIT J.PILLAI, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.JANARDHANAN PILLAI, THOLOOR HOUSE, VALANCHUZHI, PATHANAMTHITTA VILLAGE, KOZENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.V.SETHUNATH SRI.PRAKASH KESAVAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689 645. 2. SHRIRAM TRASPORT FINANCE COMPANY LTD., HAVING ADMN. OFFICE, MOOKAMBIKA COMPLEX, 4, LADY DESIAKA ROAD, MYLAPORE, CHENNAI REPRESENTED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER, COLLEGE ROAD & JUNCTION, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-689645. 3. KERALA TRANSPORT DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LTD., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE KTDFC LTD., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI R3 BY ADV. SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL, SC. KTDFC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.37028 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner of contract carriage bearing registration No. KL-03 N 924. The said vehicle is hypothecated with the third respondent through the second respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is with respect to the non-consideration of the application for renewal of contract carriage permit in respect of the aforesaid vehicle submitted before the first respondent. Evidently, the reason for the delay in consideration of the application is the failure on the part of the petitioner to produce No Objection Certificate in terms of the provisions under Section 51 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') from the financier of the said vehicle. According to the petitioner, the financier failed to respond to the requisition for issuance of No Objection Certificate and therefore, in terms of the provisions under Section 51(7) of the Act, the first respondent is bound to consider the application and pass orders thereon under Section 51(9) of the Act. It is true that Section 51(7) of the Act contains a deeming provision. But, in order to facilitate the first W.P.(C) NO.37028/2010 2 respondent to take a decision in terms of the provisions under Section 51 (7), the petitioner has to satisfy the said authority that he has taken appropriate action in terms of the provisions under Section 51(7) of the Act. It will also be open to the first respondent to issue notice to the financier to ascertain the decision. At any rate, there is no justification for delaying action on the application submitted by the petitioner for renewal of contract carriage permit in respect of the aforesaid vehicle, any further. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on the application submitted by the petitioner for renewal of contract carriage permit in respect of the aforesaid vehicle bearing registration No.KL- 03 N 924, in accordance with the provisions under Section 51 of the Act. This shall be done expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment with notice to the petitioner as also to the financier of the said vehicle viz., respondents 2 and 3. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.37028/2010 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.37028/2010 4