Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Kerala
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Lissy Abraham

High Court Of Kerala|31 October, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The petitioner approached this Court challenging Ext.P2 demand for arrears of tax for the period from 1.4.2004 to 31.12.2005, and Exts.P4 and P4(a) revenue recovery notices issued to her thereafter, for the period from 1.4.2006 to 31.3.2008. The contention of the petitioner in the writ petition is that while she was in Nagaland, she had purchased a lorry bearing registration No.NL-01-A-0144, and she had, on her transfer to the State of Kerala, hypothecated the vehicle with the 3rd respondent. Thereafter, on account of non- payment of dues to the 3rd respondent, the vehicle was seized by the 3rd respondent on 19.7.2000. It is pointed out that thereafter the vehicle was sold to the 4th respondent. In the writ petition, the limited prayer of the petitioner is against the demand made for payment of motor vehicle tax dues in respect of the vehicle for the period aforementioned. It is now submitted by counsel for the petitioner that during the pendency of the writ petition, the amounts demanded from her have already been paid to the 3rd respondent and accordingly the W.P.(C).NO.25773/2008 2 writ petition has become infructuous. He would only pray that a direction be issued to the 1st respondent to take note of the contentions in the writ petition for the purposes of correcting the entries in the files before the registering authority so as to effect a transfer of ownership of the vehicle in the name of the 4th respondent with effect from the date shown by the 3rd respondent as the date of transfer of the vehicle. 2. I have heard Sri.Sathish Ninan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as also Smt.Lilly.K.T., the learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.
On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the fact that the writ petition has virtually become infructuous on account of the payment having been made by the petitioner, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent to look into the contents of the writ petition for the limited purposes of effecting changes, if required, in the files before the registering authority, with regard to the ownership of the vehicle that had the registration No.NL-01-A-0144. This exercise would have to be W.P.(C).NO.25773/2008 3 done by the 1st respondent prior to raising further demands for motor vehicles tax dues in respect of the vehicle.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp
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

Lissy Abraham

Court

High Court Of Kerala

JudgmentDate
31 October, 2014
Judges
  • A K Jayasankaran Nambiar
Advocates
  • Sri Sathish Ninan
  • Sri Santhosh Mathew