G.Karpagam v. The Transport Commissioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.02.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD G.Karpagam ... Petitioner vs.
1. The Transport Commissioner, Guindy, Chennai 600 032.
2. The Regional Transport officer, Salem (West), Salem.
.. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to receive the application dated 21.01.2025 for registration of the vehicle bearing Chassis No.MCHJ1DC3FRPA00156 and Engine Number A3L1674743 forthwith and register the said vehicle after receiving the necessary tax to the Motor Vehicles.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ganesan For Respondents : Mr.M.Rajendiran Addl.Govt.Pleader Page No.1 of 6
ORDER
By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up and disposed of at the admission stage itself.
2. The present writ petition has been filed to issue a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to receive the application dated 21.01.2025 for registration of the vehicle bearing Chassis No.MCHJ1DC3FRPA00156 and Engine Number A3L1674743 forthwith and register the said vehicle after receiving the necessary tax to the Motor Vehicles.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he has purchased three wheeler from KG Auto Agency, JSA Authorized Dealer, Salem. Which is fitted with the Chassis No.MCHJ1DC3FRPA00156 and Engine Number A3L1674743 with seating capacity of 6 in all with cost of Rs.3,71,200/- . The petitioner produced the said vehicle along with Forms-20, 21 & 22 before the second respondent to receive the application to register the vehicle and assigned the number. The model of motor vehicle in question has been certified by the Automative Research Association of India on Page No.2 of 6
06.10.2022. As such, the above said motor vehicle ought to be registered by the Regional Transport Officer concerned without any objection to register the said motor vehicle. Thereafter, the petitioner has approached the second respondent for registration on 21.01.2025. But the second respondent refused to receive the application for registration of the said motor vehicle. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has been filed the present writ petition.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that he may be permitted to produce all the relevant documents preferred under Rule 47 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rule, 1989 to the second respondent.
5. The leaned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the application submitted by the petitioner along with all relevant documents will be considered on merits and in accordance with law.
Page No.3 of 6
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and also perused the materials available on records.
7. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the petitioner is directed to submit the application to the second respondent with all relevant documents as referred under Section 47 of the Tamil Central Motor Vehicles Act, 1989. within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such receipt of the same, the second respondent shall consider it on merits, in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks thereof.
8. This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.
14.02.2025 Index : Yes/No.
Internet : Yes/No.
Speaking : Non-speaking Order kkd Page No.4 of 6
To
1. The Transport Commissioner, Guindy, Chennai 600 032.
2. The Regional Transport officer, Salem (West), Salem.
Page No.5 of 6
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.
kkd 14.02.2025 Page No.6 of 6