Surya Laljith vs S.Ruby

Surya Laljith vs S.RUBY

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Mar 02, 2020

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1777546

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1777546
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable the Chief Justice Mr.S.Manikumar,Honourable Mr. Justice Shaji P.Chaly
Decided On: Mar 02, 2020
Case Number: WA/1190/2019

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Surya Laljith

Respondent

S.RUBY

Excerpt

.....the assistant registering authority shall conduct inspection of the vehicle by an inspection team consisting ofofficers holding the requisite technical qualification, in orderto satisfy that the vehicle complies with the provisions under the mv act and the rules made thereunder.61. minor defects, if any, found on such inspectionshall be permitted to be rectified by the petitioner, within a time timit to be fixed by the assistant registering authority. if, based on the report of the inspection team, the assistant registering authority is satisfied that the petitioner's contract ..3..carriage, which has been issued with a fitness certificate, no longer complies with all the requirements of the mv act and the rules made thereunder, w.p.(c)no.4720/2018 66 proceedings under sub-section (4) of section 56 of the mv act for cancellation of the certificate of fitness of the petitioner's vehicle shall be intitated forthwith, in accordance with the procedure contemplated under sub-section (4), which shall be finalised without any delay.62. the petitioner shall offer her explanation, if any,to ext.p2 check report before the 2nd respondent regional transport officer, alappuzha, within two weeks from the date of recipt of a certified copy of this judgment. thereafter, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same, with notice to the petitioner and after affording her an opportunity of being heard, and decide the further course to be taken aginst the petitioner for the irregularities detected in ext.p2 check report. a decision in this regard shall be taken, as expeditiously as posssible, at any rate, within a further period of three weeks.”2. though the correctness of the above said judgment ischallenged on various grounds, on this day, when the matter came up for hearing, sri.vipindas t.k., learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that the state transport authority has passed an order dated 09.01.2020. in such circumstances, the appellant seeks to withdraw the.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY MONDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 12TH PHALGUNA, 1941 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 4720/2018(L) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT/S: SURYA LALJITH, AGED 40 YEARS W/O. LALJITH, VALIYATHARAYIL HOUSE, THAZHAVA, MANAPPALLY NORTH P.O, KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-690 574
BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS RESPONDENT/S: 1 S.RUBY, VADAKKEVILAVEEDU, THOTTAKADU P.O, OTTOOR, KALLAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 015 2 TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHAKAD-695 014 3 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688 991 R2-3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER OTHER PRESENT: SRI.P.SANTHOSHKUMAR, SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..2..

JUDGMENT

S.Manikumar, CJ. Instant writ appeal is filed against the judgment dated 27.09.2018 in WP(C) No.4720 of 2018, by which a learned Single Judge, after considering the pleadings and submissions, passed the following;

“60. In the instant case, admittedly the petitioner has not obtained any sanction under R W.P.(C)No.4720/2018 65 of the CMV rules; exhibit the name and address of the operator as specified in clause (g) of Section 84 of the MV Act; exhibit the particulars enumerated in clauses (a) to (g) of Rule 93 of the KMV Rules; etc. Thereafter, the petitioner shall produce her vehicle for inspection before the Assistant Registering Authority, Attingal, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. On such production, the Assistant Registering Authority shall conduct inspection of the vehicle by an inspection team consisting of

officers holding the requisite technical qualification, in order

to satisfy that the vehicle complies with the provisions under the MV Act and the rules made thereunder.

61. Minor defects, if any, found on such inspection

shall be permitted to be rectified by the petitioner, within a time timit to be fixed by the Assistant Registering Authority. If, based on the report of the inspection team, the Assistant Registering Authority is satisfied that the petitioner's contract ..3..

carriage, which has been issued with a fitness certificate, no longer complies with all the requirements of the MV Act and the rules made thereunder, W.P.(C)No.4720/2018 66 proceedings under sub-section (4) of Section 56 of the MV Act for cancellation of the certificate of fitness of the petitioner's vehicle shall be intitated forthwith, in accordance with the procedure contemplated under sub-section (4), which shall be finalised without any delay.

62. The petitioner shall offer her explanation, if any,

to Ext.P2 check report before the 2nd respondent Regional Transport Officer, Alappuzha, within two weeks from the date of recipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent shall consider the same, with notice to the petitioner and after affording her an opportunity of being heard, and decide the further course to be taken aginst the petitioner for the irregularities detected in Ext.P2 check report. A decision in this regard shall be taken, as expeditiously as posssible, at any rate, within a further period of three weeks.”

2. Though the correctness of the above said judgment is

challenged on various grounds, on this day, when the matter came up for hearing, Sri.Vipindas T.K., learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that the State Transport Authority has passed an order dated 09.01.2020. In such circumstances, the appellant seeks to withdraw the instant appeal with right to challenge the above said order. ..4.. Placing on record the above submission, instant writ appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the appellant to challenge the

order issued by the State Transport Authority on 09.01.2020 by taking

recourse to Section 89 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Sd/- S.MANIKUMAR CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE Bka/02.03.2020 ..5.. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE PERTAINING TO VEHICLE OWNED BY THE APPELLANT. ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT DATED 28.03.2018 ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KARUNAGAPPALLY. ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KARUNAGAPPALLY BEARING

ORDER NO. 23/15215/2018 DATED

24.03.2018. ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 29.01.2019 ISSUED BY THE MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTOR ATTACHED TO THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, KOLLAM (ENFORCEMENT). ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT FOR RENEWAL OF THE ADVERTISEMENT PERMIT DATED 2.3.2019. ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 27.02.2019 ISSUED BY SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE KARUNAGAPPALLY.

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2020 Same Parties Surya Laljith vs S.RUBY Same Judge Honourable the Chief Justice Mr.S.Manikumar,Honourable Mr. Ju...