Kerala High Court
Joseph Valakuzhy Eapen vs State Of Kerala on 22 October, 2024
1
W.P.(C) No.39064 of 2022
2024:KER:78466
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON
TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 30TH ASWINA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 39064 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
JOSEPH VALAKUZHY EAPEN
19-B KNIGHTS, SKYLINE IMPERIAL GARDENS,
STADIUM LINK ROAD, PALARIVATTOM
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682025
BY ADVS.
A.KUMAR
P.J.ANILKUMAR
G.MINI(1748)
P.S.SREE PRASAD
JOB ABRAHAM
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT, MOTOR VEHICLE DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANATHAPURAM - 695014
2 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORT
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, FORT P.O.,
THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN - 695023
3 JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER
JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030
BY ADV.
SRI.SAYED M. THANGAL - GP
2
W.P.(C) No.39064 of 2022
2024:KER:78466
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 22.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
3
W.P.(C) No.39064 of 2022
2024:KER:78466
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.39064 of 2022
------------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2024
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has purchased a motor vehicle pursuant to
Ext.P1 invoice issued by the dealer. The petitioner points out that the
car purchased as above was not a brand new one, and in fact it was
a "demo" car, which had already clocked in excess of 16,000 kms.
On account of the above, the price charged from the petitioner as
per Ext.P1 was Rs.40,39,999/- inclusive of the GST payable under
the relevant statute. The petitioner points out that when the car was
presented for registration, he was made to satisfy an amount of
Rs.12,85,041/-, with reference to the price of the car being offered
by the manufacturer as a new one. The petitioner satisfied the afore
demand and has got the car registered, as evidenced by Exts.P3 and
P4.
2. Pointing out that the demand of the excess motor vehicle
tax with reference to the provisions of the Kerala Motor Vehicles
Taxation Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the "Taxation Act" for
short) is illegal and arbitrary, pursuant to Ext.P7 judgment of this
Court, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P5 application to the Regional
2024:KER:78466
Transport Officer, Kakkanad, Ernakulam, seeking refund of the
excess motor vehicle tax demanded from him. He has pointed out in
the afore application that he needs to have paid only Rs.8,48,400/-
towards the motor vehicle tax and therefore has sought for the
refund of the difference of Rs.4,36,641/-.
3. Pointing out that, in spite of submitting the application as
above, the respondents are not acting upon the same, the captioned
writ petition is filed by the petition.
4. I have heard Sri.A.Kumar, the learned Senior Counsel for
the petitioner and Sri.Sayed M.Thangal, the learned Government
Pleader for the respondents herein.
5. It is noticed that, as rightly contended by the learned
Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the liability to satisfy the motor
vehicle tax with reference to the relevant provisions of the Taxation
Act only requires the petitioner to have satisfied the motor vehicle
tax with reference to the purchase value as evidenced by the invoice
received by the petitioner from the supplier. In the case at hand,
Ext.P1 is the invoice received by the petitioner from the supplier. The
value contained in Ext.P1 ought to have been acted upon while they
were collecting the motor vehicle tax from the petitioner at the time
of registering the vehicle in question.
2024:KER:78466
6. It is also noticed that the dictum laid down in Ext.P7 also
supports the claim of the petitioner with reference to the purchase
value as available in the invoice received by him.
In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that this writ
petition can be disposed of as under;
i. The 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on
Ext.P5 application filed by the petitioner, with specific
reference to Ext.P7 judgment, within a period of two
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment.
ii. The petitioner also to be granted an opportunity of
being heard in the matter, while passing orders as
above.
iii. So as to facilitate the disposal as above, the
petitioner / his representative to appear before the
3rd respondent herein, on 30.10.2024 at 11 a.m.
Sd/-
HARISANKAR V. MENON
JUDGE
anm
2024:KER:78466
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39064/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF INVOICE NO. RM011819DCI00027
DATED 30.03.2019
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF SERVICE HISTORY OF THE
VEHICLE PURCHASED BY THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF TAX LICENSE IN FORM ETL DATED
NIL
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE
OF THE VEHICLE DATED 13.05.2019
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 16.08.2022 TO
THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT
RECEIPT
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 30.01.2020 IN
WPC NO. 2399 OF 2020
