Kerala High Court
Vinod vs Tata Motors Finance Ltd on 5 June, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 15TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 12027 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
VINOD
AGED 44 YEARS, S/O VASUMOHAN PUTHUKULATH
CHAITHANYA KOODAL VILLAGE KOODAL P.O
PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689693.
BY ADVS.
M.T.SURESHKUMAR
MANJUSHA K
SREELAKSHMI SABU
RESPONDENTS:
1 TATA MOTORS FINANCE LTD
LODHA ITHINK TECHNO CAMPUS, A-WING,
2ND FLOOR,POKHRAN ROAD NO. 2, OF EASTERNS
EXPRESS HIGHWAY , THANE WEST , MUMBAI,
STATE OF MAHARAKSHTRA .REPRESENTED BY SAMRAT
GUPTHA CEO & MANAGING DIRECTOR, PIN - 400601.
2 THE BRANCH MANAGER
TATA MOTORS FINANCE LTD., UKEDIFICE,
4TH FLOOR, VALIYASAL , CHALAI P O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 685036.
3 MIDHUN R
S/O RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, KULANGARA VEEDU,
MAVINMOODU, VALAMCHERI , KILIMANOOR P O ,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695601.
4 REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER
ATTINGAL RTO, 1ST FLOOR AVITTOM COMPLEX ,
MAMAM, ATTINGAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695101.
W.P.(C)No.12027 of 2024
:2:
5 SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER
KONNI P O , PATHANAMTHITTA - 689691.
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.S.GOPINATHAN, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.FAZIL P
SRI.SAJU THALIATH
SRI.JITHIN PAUL VARGHESE
SMT.JAYASREE MANOJ
SMT.C.PRABITHA
SRI.FADIL FAZIL
SMT.ASWATHY JAYACHANDRAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C)No.12027 of 2024
:3:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 5th day of June, 2024
The petitioner, who is transferee of a goods vehicle, has
approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-
(i) To call for all the records pertaining to
Ext.P7.
(ii) To issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus, or
any other direction or order commanding respondents 4
and 5 to accept the application of the petitioner or the
registered owner to renew necessary permits, issue
certificate of registration with necessary changes ought
to assign new registration marks as per the provisions of
the Motor Vehicles Act.
(iii) To declare that respondents 1 and 2 are
bound to issue necessary certificates, permits or to issue
certificate under Form 35 of the Central Motor Vehicle
rules 1989 in favour of the petitioner enabling him to
transfer the vehicle and permits in to his name .
(iv) To issue such other reliefs as this Hon'ble
Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of this case.
(v) To dispense with the English translation of
the Malayalam documents produced along with the writ
petition for the time being and to produce the same as
and when it is required or directed by this honourable
court."
2. The petitioner submits that unless respondents 4
and 5 accept the application submitted by the petitioner or
submitted by the registered owner for transfer of permit, the
petitioner will be put to difficulties. Similarly, respondents 1 and
2 are compellable to issue NOC since the loan account in
respect of the vehicle concerned has been settled.
3. Senior Government Pleader, on instructions,
however submits that the petitioner and the owner of the
vehicle have not submitted an application for transfer of the
ownership of the vehicle and the petitioner will have to issue
hypothecation termination also from the Financier.
4. Standing Counsel representing respondents 1 and
2 resisted the writ petition. The Standing Counsel submitted
that it is for the 3rd respondent to make an application in this
regard. Respondents 1 and 2 have a lien over the account in
respect of financial advances taken by the 3 rd respondent for
other vehicles. The 3rd respondent has waived his right in this
regard voluntarily, contended the Standing Counsel for
respondents 1 and 2.
5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner,
the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 1 and
2 and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing
respondents 4 to 5. Notice to the 3 rd respondent is dispensed
with in the nature of the relief to be granted in this writ petition.
6. This Court has considered the implication of
Section 51 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rule 61 of the
Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and it has been held that
when a person has repaid the entire liability under the hire
purchase / hypothecation in respect of his vehicle, then NOC
cannot be denied by the Financier to such persons on the
ground that Banker's general lien in respect of another
transaction would extend to the vehicle (Amjath P.S. v.
Manager, Indusind Bank Limited and others [2024 (2) KLT
307]).
Taking into consideration the law laid down by this Court,
the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to
issue NOC in respect of the vehicle in question, if a proper
application is made by the 3 rd respondent. The 3rd respondent
and the petitioner shall make application for transfer of the
vehicles through Parivahan Portal along with hypothecation
termination / duly filled Form-35 NOC. If the 3 rd respondent
and the petitioner submit all requisite documents as above, the
respondents shall take appropriate decision expeditiously.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
ams
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12027/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RC BOOK OF THE VEHICLE
WITH DATE OF REGISTRATION 31-8-2021
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE GOODS PERMIT OF THE
VEHICLE DATED 9-9-2021 VALID UPTO
8-9-2026
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED
27-7-2023
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT
EXECUTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT AND THE
PETITIONER DATED 3-7-2023
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 29 ALSO SIGNED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 3-7-2023
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 30 ALSO SIGNED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 3-7-2023
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT DATED 26-6-2023
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL NOTICE DATED
16-2-2024 ISSUED ON BEHALF OF THE
PETITIONER
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE ISSUED ON
BEHALF OF THE FINANANCIER DATED
29-2-2024
