Madras High CourtWP/92/2026disposed of

Prabhavathy v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Transport

2026-01-08Honourable Mr.Justice V. Lakshminarayanan6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.01.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN Prabhavathy ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Deputy Commissioner of Transport, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

2. The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai (South West) No.47 & 49, Kaliamman Koil Street, Sai Nagar, Virugambakkam, Chennai - 600 092.

3. The Regional Transport Officer, No.5, Kalnarmapuram, Ex-Serviceman Welfare Association Compound, Pudukottai, Tamil nadu 622 001.

4. The Regional Transport Officer, Coimbatore (South) No.100, Peelamedu - Pudur Main Raod, Peelamedu, Nehru Nagar West, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu - 641 004.

5. The Regional Transport Officer, No.79, Pattunool Chatram, Government Hospital Backside, SH110, Katchipedu, Sriperumbudur, Tamil Nadu - 602 105.

6. The Regional Transport Officer, Chennai (East), Power Mills Road, Grey Nagar, Pulianthope, Chennai - 600 012.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to dispose the appeal dated 05.09.2025 and acknowledged by the first respondent in Lr.No.36379/HB2/2025, dated 04.10.2025.

For Petitioner : Ms.U.Santhanalakshmi For Respondents : Mr.M.Shajahan Special Government Pleader O RDER This Writ Petition has been filed for a direction to direct the first respondent to dispose the petitioner's appeal dated 05.09.2025.

The petitioner is the wife of one Sivakumar. Sivakumar and his brother Sivaganam were carrying on business under the name and style of "M/s.SSS Crane Service" at Kancheepuram. Sivakumar passed away on 21.02.2018, leaving behind his mother Poiyathammal, two minor children viz., Saranraj and Haswinraj and the petitioner as his legal heirs. The petitioner alleges that her brother-in-law, Sivaganam, had sold four earth moving vehicles, registrations of which stood in the name of her husband Sivakumar, without her consent. On account of the transfer, the vehicles now stand in the name of one S.Gunaseelan, son of Sivasubramanian. 3.

Claiming that the action of the Regional Transport Officers in transferring the vehicles from the name of Sivakumar to the name of S.Gunaseelan as illegal, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the first respondent. As the appeal has been kept pending, the petitioner is before this Court.

Perusal of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the MV Act") shows that from an order of transfer passed under Section

50 of the MV Act, an appeal lies under Section 57 of the MV Act. Similarly, against the order of a registering authority, under the Rule 127 of the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicle Rules, 1998, an appeal lies before the Deputy Transport Commissioner.

As the petitioner has invoked the right of statutory appeal and since the same is pending, I am inclined to give a direction for earlier disposal. The appeal shall be disposed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. It is needless to add, before any order is passed, the first respondent shall hear the petitioner and all parties who might be affected by the order.

With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

08.01.2026 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order rts