Kerala High Court
Aisha Beevi vs The Joint Regional Transport Officer ... on 23 February, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024/4TH PHALGUNA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 5692 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
AISHA BEEVI
AGED 53 YEARS, W/O MUHAMMED BAHEER,
SHABEER MANZIL, KARUKONE, KARUKONE P.O.,
ALAYAMON, KOLLAM, PIN - 691 306.
BY ADVS.
R.N.SANDEEP
B.MUHAMMED SHAHEEL
KEERTHI VIJAYAN
ATHIRA UTHAMAN
RESPONDENT:
THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER
KOTTARAKKARA SRTO,KOTTARAKKARA,
MINI CIVIL STATION, KOTTARAKKARA P O,
KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691 506.
BY
SREEJITH V.S, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.5692 of 2024
:2:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2024
The petitioner states that the petitioner is the
owner of a car. Car was earlier in the name of the daughter
in law of the petitioner. The daughter in law transferred the
car in the name of the petitioner. When the petitioner tried to
open the portal / profile of the petitioner, it is noted that the
SRTO, Kottarakkara, Kerala has locked the portal based on
a complaint filed by the daughter in law of the petitioner.
2. The petitioner states that there is no fraud
involved in the transfer of the vehicle in the name of the
petitioner. A complaint has been filed due to matrimonial
dispute between the son and the daughter in law of the
petitioner. As the portal has been locked, the petitioner is
unable to make transaction in respect of the vehicle. The
petitioner has therefore submitted Ext.P3 representation to
the Regional Transport Officer, Kottarakkara. Unless Ext.P3
representation is considered, the petitioner will be put to
untold hardship, contends the petitioner.
3. Government Pleader entered appearance on
behalf of the respondent and resisted the writ petition. On
behalf of the respondent, it is submitted that a complaint was
received from the daughter in law of the petitioner alleging
that the transfer documents in respect of the vehicles were
manipulated and the signatures are forged. On enquiry, the
respondent found that there is a criminal case lodged in the
police station also in this regard. It is in such circumstances
that the portal has been locked.
4. I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for
the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader
representing the respondent.
5. The dispute is regarding the transfer of the vehicle
in the name of the petitioner. On the basis of a complaint, the
respondent suspects that there is some manipulation
involved in the transfer of the vehicle.
6. Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
complaint filed before the police station in this regard stands
already closed, as the police was convinced that the
complaint arose out of a matrimonial dispute.
7. In the facts of the case, as the police has closed
the case, the respondent-Joint Regional Transport Officer
has to take a decision in the matter in accordance with law.
In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed
of directing the respondent-Joint Regional Transport Officer
to consider Ext.P3 representation submitted by the petitioner
and take appropriate decision thereon after granting
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and any other affected
parties.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
AMR
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5692/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RC BOOK OF CAR
BEARING NO. KL 08 BS 8150.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE OWNERSHIP
STATUS OF THE CAR BEARING NO. KL 08 BS
8150.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
20/07/2023 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.
