High CourtsSingle Bench

Prasad.N.V vs Regional Transport Officer

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 26 July 2023 · Citation: (2023) 07 KL CK 0207

HON’BLE JUDGES
C.S Dias, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 23928 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 282 words

C.S Dias, J

1.

The writ petition is filed to direct the respondent to permit the petitioner to pay the arrears of motor vehicles tax arrears in respect of the stage carriage vehicle bearing registration No.KL-45/K 9785 in ten equated monthly installments.

2.

The petitioner's case is that he is the registered owner of the above vehicle. The vehicle met with an accident and sustained serious damages. Hence the petitioner could not operate the vehicle. Consequently, the motor vehicles tax fell in arrears. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P1 request before the respondent to pay the arrears in installments. But the petitioner is apprehensive that the respondent may initiate recovery proceedings to realise the amount. Hence, the Writ Petition.

3.

Heard; Sri.O.D.Sivadas, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Thushara James, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

4.

Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and taking note of the limited relief that has been prayed for by the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition.

Resultantly, I order the writ petition as follows:

(i) The petitioner is permitted to pay the motor vehicles tax in respect of the above vehicle in six equated monthly installments commencing from 26.08.2023.

(iii) It is made clear that, if the petitioner defaults in payment of any one of the installments as directed above, the petitioner would lose the benefit of this judgment and the respondent would be at liberty to revive the recovery proceedings from the stage it presently stands, and bring it to its logical conclusion in accordance with law.

(iv) It is made clear that, no further application for modification/extension of time shall be entertained.