IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2008 / 7TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 17235 of 2005(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ T. BABY GIRIJA, W/O. LATE CHANDRA BABU AGED 45 YEARS, RAKENDU, T.K.D. ROAD, MUTTADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KOLLAM. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SMITHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/08/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 24531 OF 2005 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX (WPC 17235 OF 2005) PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF STAGE CARRIAGE BEARING REGN.NO.KRQ 3103 EXT. P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 14.3.2000 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DATED 20.10.2004 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DEMANDING AN AMOUNT OF RS. 4,18,500/- AS ARREARS OF MOTOR VEHICLE TAX. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 20.10.2004 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DEMANDING THE ATTACHMENT OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED ;11.5.2005 FROM THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 17235 & 24531 OF 2005 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT The common petitioner in both the Writ Petitions is challenging recovery proceedings for recovery of arrears of motor vehicle tax due for a stage carriage for the period commencing from 1.10.1997 to 31.10.2000. Though petitioner's case is that vehicle was operated by her husband, and after his death petitioner operated the vehicle for some time and thereafter vehicle was in G form, the RTO has filed a counter affidavit stating that for the period the vehicle was not in operation, exemption was granted. However, even though petitioner applied for exemption for two quarters ending on 30.6.1997 and 30.9.1997, the place of garage of vehicle in G form was different and therefore exemption was not granted. Petitioner conceded operation of the vehicle till October, 1997 and thereafter petitioner reported that vehicle was missing. It is very strange to believe that inspite of missing of the vehicle petitioner has not launched FIR before the police. There is nothing to indicate that the vehicle was covered by 2 insurance and petitioner has claimed any damages for loss of vehicle. If vehicle is not granted exemption, then tax has to be recovered from the registered owner under Section 3(3) of the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act. Petitioner being the registered owner is liable to clear the arrears. WPs are devoid of any merit and are dismissed. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3