The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers;
“i. To call for the records leading to the Petitioner's 2014 Model Light Motor Vehicle (Passenger Car), Mercedes Benz bearing Engine No:65192432273431, Chasis No:WDD2120036L045623 from the 2nd Respondent, and To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 2nd Respondent to register the Petitioner's 2014 Model Light Motor Vehicle (Passenger Car), Mercedes Benz bearing Engine No:65192432273431, Chasis No: WDD2120036L045623 covered in Ext.P1 to P4 in view of the tax already paid by the Petitioner without insisting additional tax as per Ext.P5 Ordinance within a stipulated time as directed by this Hon'ble Court.
ii. To declare that the Petitioner is entitled to get registration of 2014 Model Light Motor Vehicle (Passenger Car), Mercedes Benz bearing Engine No : 65192432273431, Chasis No: WDD2120036L045623 covered in Ext.P1 to P4 taking in to consideration the tax already paid by the Petitioner in the specified rate by the 2nd Respondent without insisting additional tax on the basis of Ext.P5 Ordinance.”
2. The petitioner sought to register the newly purchased 'Mercedes Benz' vehicle before the 2nd respondent. Ext.P1 is the WP(c). No. 31495 of 2014 2 Sale Certificate dated 24.10.2014 and Ext.P2 is the insurance policy. The petitioner obtained temporary registration on 24.10.2014 as borne by Ext.P4 and the tax as payable at that point of time was satisfied vide Ext.P3 receipt dated 29.10.2014. Permanent registration is to be obtained within 30 days, as per the relevant provisions of law and when the petitioner produced the vehicle for taking permanent registration within such time, the respondents insisted to satisfy some more amount as the differential portion of tax liability, by virtue of enhancement of tax pursuant to Ext.P5 Ordinance bearing No.30/2014, which has brought into effect from 15.11.2014, which lad to the writ petition.
3. The contention of the petitioner is that, the liability of the petitioner is to satisfy the tax 'from the date of purchase' and as such, the rate which was prevalent on the date of purchase alone could be realised as 'one time tax' payable in terms of 2nd proviso to Section 3 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act.
3. Heard the learned Governed Pleader as well, who points out that the idea and understanding the petitioner is per se wrong and misconceived in all respects. Similar issue had come WP(c). No. 31495 of 2014 3 up for consideration before this Court earlier, and as per the decision rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Hilal B. and Another V. State of Kerala and Others (2012 (3) KHC 284), it was categorically made clear that the term 'first registration' referred to in Section 3 of the Act cannot be the temporary registration, but can only be the 'permanent registration'. As such, the rate of tax applicable is as on the date of permanent registration of the vehicle, under the revised tariff. Admittedly, the tariff has undergone a change by virtue of Ext.P5 Ordinance, by the time the petitioner took the vehicle for permanent registration. This being the position, the vehicle can be registered only subject to satisfaction of the tax at the higher rate, in terms of Ext.P5 Ordinance.
In the above circumstances, this Court finds that the issue is squarely covered against the petitioner and as such, this Court does not find any merit in the writ petition.
The writ petition is dismissed accordingly.
Sd/-
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
Pn