IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE24H DAY OF SEPTEMBER20132ND ASWINA, 1935 W.P.(C).No.23252 of 2013 (F) ----------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- NABIEL MATHEW CHERIAN, AGED30YEARS, S/O.MATHEW CHERIAN, MUNDANICAL HOUSE MANARCAUD P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686 019. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.AJITHKUMAR (VALATH). RESPONDENTS:- -------------------------- 1. THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, KOTTYAM, COLLECTORATE BUILDING, KOTTAYAM.
2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER FOR THE STATE OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001. R1 & R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED SHAFI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON2409-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 23252 of 2013 (F) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- ------------------------------------- EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF SALE CERTIFICATE DATED238-2013 ISSUED FROM POPULAR MEGA MOTORS. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE BROCHURE OF THE VEHICLE. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE AUTOMOTIVE RESEARCH ASSOCIATION OF INDIA DATED0901-2008. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN WP(C). NO.6959/13 DATED1303-2013. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN WP(C).NO.20439/13 DATED198-2013. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- --------------------------------------- NIL. ( TRUE COPY ) K. Vinod Chandran, J.
------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.23252 of 2013-F ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of September, 2013 JUDGMENT
The learned Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. The petitioner, owner of a TATA XENON CREW CAB3OL DICOR BS-III, seeks registration of the same as a Non-Transport Vehicle, since he had purchased it for his private use and, hence, does not intend to use it as a goods carriage vehicle. However, the 1st respondent has refused to register it as a Non-Transport Vehicle for private use, since, according to the authority, it is a Light Goods Vehicle and a Transport Vehicle. Since the issue is no longer res integra, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself, following the dictum laid down in Cheriyan v. Transport Commissioner [2009 (2) KLT583.
3. In Cheriyan's case (supra) this Court had declared that with respect to vehicles which are constructed and adapted for carriage of goods and carriage of passengers, the primary aspect to be considered is the use to which it is put. It was also declared that if the vehicle in question is a Light Motor Vehicle, then the registration ought to be granted in that category and not as a goods carriage, if it WP(C).No.23252 of 2013-F - 2 - is not intended to be used as a goods carriage. It was also clarified that if at all the vehicle was used other than for the purpose for which it was registered, then it was open to the authorities to re-classify the vehicle as a Transport Vehicle.
4. In the above circumstances, on the petitioner filing an affidavit undertaking to use the vehicle only as a Non-Transport Vehicle, the 1st respondent-Registering Authority shall grant registration to the vehicle of the petitioner as a Non-Transport Vehicle within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is allowed. No costs. Sd/- K.Vinod Chandran Judge. vku/- ( true copy )