← Library
Madras High CourtWP/8708/2018dismissed

Ramesh, v. The Transport Commissioner,

2018-04-12Honourable Mr Justice T.Raja2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 12.04.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.No.8708 of 2018 Ramesh

...Petitioner

Versus

1. The Transport Commissioner, Regional Transport Department, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-5.

2. The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai South-East, Mandaveli, Chennai-28.

3. C.Subramanian ... Respondents Prayer:

Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.2.2018 and direct the 2nd respondent to take appropriate action against the 3rd respondent to transfer the ownership of the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN 06 K 2396 in the name of 3rd respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.E.Viswanathan For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.I.Sathish, Addl. Govt. Pleader

O R D E R

The Writ Petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.2.2018 and further directing the 2nd respondent to take appropriate action against the 3rd respondent to transfer the ownership of the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN 06 K 2396 in his name. 2.

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.

On the face of the records, this Court is of the view that the Writ Petition is not at all maintainable. The reason is that firstly, it appears that the petitioner has sold his vehicle to the 3rd respondent, namely, C.Subramanian for a valuable consideration of Rs.8,10,000/- on 10.5.2017. Thereafter, it appears that the 3rd respondent has not taken any step to transfer the ownership of the vehicle purchased from the petitioner in his name. When the 3rd respondent is not responding to the call of the petitioner, the petitioner cannot approach this Court by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to transfer the ownership of the vehicle bearing Registration No.TN 06 K 2396 in the name of the 3rd respondent.

4.

In view of all the above, the Writ Petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS VIII) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar tsi To

1. The Transport Commissioner, Regional Transport Department, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-5.

2. The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai South-East, Mandaveli, Chennai-28.

W.P.No.8708/2018 vgii(co) nr 03/05/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/