Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

K Suresh Nayak And Others vs Senior Regional Transport Officer And Registering Authority And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|19 March, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION Nos.29369 – 29372/2018 (MV) BETWEEN:
1. K.SURESH NAYAK S/O DEVARAYA NAYAK, AGE 50 YEARS, DOOR NO.02-02-44J1F, SHIRIBEEDU REEGAL TOWER, NEAR CITY BUS STAND, UDUPI-576101.
2. PRASAD KUMAR BALLAL S/O LATE SUBODH BALLAL, ANANTHAPADMANABHA MOTORS MAIN ROAD, HEBRI, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576112. ... PETITIONERS [BY SRI M.E.NAGESH, ADV.] AND:
1. SENIOR REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER AND REGISTERING AUTHORITY, RAJATHADRI, UDUPI-576101 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO TRANSPORT, M.S.BUILDING, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001 …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI DILDAR SHIRALLI, HCGP.] THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND DIRECT R-1 IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING HIM TO REGISTER THE VEHICLES OF THE PETITIONERS AS PER THE BODY CONSTRUCTED TO THE CHASSIS OF THE VEHICLES NO.MC2P2LRTOJC398231, MC2P2LRTOJC398232, MC2P2LRTOJC398233, MCP2P2LRTOJC 398230 VIDE ANNEX-A1 TO A4.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
In these writ petitions, the petitioners have sought for a direction, directing respondent No.1 to register the vehicles of the petitioners as per the body constructed to the chassis of the vehicles Nos. MC2P2LRTOJC398231, MC2P2LRTOJC398232, MC2P2LRTOJC398233 and MC2P2LRTOJC398230 as per Annexures – A1 to A4 in terms of Rule 125C of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules (‘CMV Rules’ ).
2. The learned counsel appearing for respondents would submit that the requests of the petitioners have been already considered and the vehicles in question are registered in terms of Rule 125C of the CMV Rules. Hence, these writ petitions do not survive for consideration. The same is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
In view of the aforesaid, the writ petitions stand disposed of as having become infructuous.
In view of the disposal of the writ petitions, pending application stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE PMR
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

K Suresh Nayak And Others vs Senior Regional Transport Officer And Registering Authority And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
19 March, 2019
Judges
  • S Sujatha