Kerala High Court
Shibu vs Binu Jose on 27 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 5TH SRAVANA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 24054 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
SHIBU
AGED 50 YEARS, S/O., SARADA , 10/347, ARUKAKKAL HOUSE,
VELIYANNUR. MEENACHIL TALUK
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686634
BY ADVS.
G.HARIHARAN
PRAVEEN.H.
K.S.SMITHA
V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR
ANJALY T.A
RESPONDENTS:
1 BINU JOSE
S/O.JOSE, KAMPIKKARA HOUSE, MUTHALAMKODE,
THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685584
2 THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER
SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,
THERUATH BUILDING, UZHAVOORMONIPALLY ROAD,
UZHAVOOR, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT- 686634
3 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER
TRANS TOWER, VAZUTHACADU
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695014.
4 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT TRIVANDRUM- 695001
OTHER PRESENT:
ADV. THUSHARA JAMES (SR GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P (C) No.24054/2022 -2-
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this court seeking the following reliefs;
"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or
order commanding the 2nd respondent to seize the vehicle mentioned in
Exhibit P1 from the 1st respondent invoking the provisions of Section 13
(2) of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1976 and to realize the
arrears accrued on the Ext.P1 vehicle from the 1 st respondent by sale of
the vehicle; and.
(ii) To pass such other orders or reliefs as this Honourable Court
deems fit in the interest of justice."
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had entered into an
agreement with the 1st respondent under which a vehicle bearing registration
No.KL-38C-3132, belonging to the petitioner, was handed over to the 1 st
respondent. It is stated that one of the conditions upon which the vehicle was
handed over to the 1st respondent is that the 1st respondent will duly discharge the
liabilities to M/s. Sundaram Finance, Ernakulam in terms of the loan agreement
executed by the petitioner for availing a loan to purchase the vehicle. It is submitted
that the 1st respondent has committed default in making payments to M/s.
Sundaram Finance and going by the terms of the agreement between the petitioner
and the 1st respondent the petitioner is entitled to repossess the vehicle. It is
submitted that owing to the obstruction caused using goondas, at the instance of the
1st respondent the petitioner has not been in a position to repossess the vehicle. In
the meanwhile the petitioner has been served with a demand for payment of motor
vehicle tax. The petitioner has approached this court seeking the aforesaid reliefs
stating that the Motor Vehicle Department is entitled to seize a vehicle for failure to
remit the motor vehicle tax.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Senior Government Pleader, I am clearly of the view that the steps to be taken to
recover the motor vehicle tax on default being committed is a matter is entirely
within the purview of official respondents. The private dispute between the
petitioner and the 1st respondent cannot be resolved by issuing a Mandamus to the
official respondents to take possession of the vehicle. I make it clear that it will be
open to the respondents to seize the vehicle if they decide to do so. However, a
mandamus cannot be issued for the same. Accordingly this writ petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
AMG
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24054/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE RELATING
TO BUS KL-38C-3132
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE
PETITIONER AND 1ST RESPONDENT ON 01.12.2018
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 06.05.2022
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE NAME OF THE
PETITIONER
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 31.05.2022 FILED BY
THE PETITIONER ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
