The petitioner's grievance in the above writ petition is against the tax demand made, for a vehicle bearing registration No.KL-4-C- 3411. The challenge is on the ground that the petitioner has sold the vehicle to the fourth respondent. The petitioner contends that he sold the said vehicle by Ext.P1 sale deed. Subsequently the petitioner claims to have intimated the registering authority by Ext.P3, the factum of sale which communication, the registering authority has received as evidenced by Ext.P4 acknowledgement. The petitioner's prayer in the above writ petition is to direct consideration of Ext.P5 representation. The petitioner has infact satisfied the tax demand and Ext.P5 is to effect the transfer of ownership in the registration certificate of the vehicle. 2. The transfer of registration as per the Motor Vehicles Act can only be in accordance with section 50 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rule 55 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The transfer has to be sought for, in the form
W.P.(C)No.33043 of 2014
2
prescribed and the same has to be done within 14 days of the date of transfer. Obviously the same has not been done. Exts.P1 and P3 cannot be acted upon by the registering authority since the same is not in compliance with the procedure prescribed under the Act and Rules. The petitioner would have to take appropriate remedies available to him as against the third respondent on the basis of the agreement of transfer. The registering authority cannot be compelled to act on Exts.P1, P3 or P5.
In such circumstances, the writ petition would stand dismissed, leaving open the remedies available to the petitioner.
vpv Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE