The learned Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. The petitioner, owner of a 'MAHINDRA GENIO' Motor Vehicle, seeks registration of the same as Non- Transport Vehicle, since he had purchased it for his private use and, hence, does not intend to use it as a goods carriage vehicle. However, the 2nd respondent respondent has refused to register it as a Non-Transport Vehicle for private use, since, according to the authority, it is a Light Goods Vehicle and a Transport Vehicle. Since the issue is no longer res integra, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself, following the dictum laid down in Cheriyan v. Transport Commissioner [2009 (2) KLT 583].
3. In Cheriyan's case (supra) this Court had declared that with respect to vehicles which are constructed and W.P.(c) No. 28939 of 2014 2 adapted for carriage of goods and carriage of passengers, the primary aspect to be considered is the use to which it is put. It was also declared that if the vehicle in question is a Light Motor Vehicle, then the registration ought to be granted in that category and not as a goods carriage, if it is not intended to be used as a goods carriage. It was also clarified that if at all the vehicle was used other than for the purpose for which it was registered, then it was open to the authorities to re-classify the vehicle as a Transport Vehicle.
4. In the above circumstances, on the petitioner filing an affidavit undertaking to use the vehicle only as a Non- Transport Vehicle, the 2nd respondent/Registering Authority shall grant registration to the vehicle of the petitioner as a Non-Transport Vehicle within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is allowed. No costs.
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE DMR/-