High Court Kerala High Court

V.J.Sebastian vs The Regional Transport Officer on 3 July, 2009

Kerala High Court
V.J.Sebastian vs The Regional Transport Officer on 3 July, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 24484 of 2004(M)


1. V.J.SEBASTIAN, MANAGING PARTNER,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,

3. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,

4. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.I.DINESH MENON

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

 Dated :03/07/2009

 O R D E R
                  P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                     W.P. (C) No. 24484 of 2004
                     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                 Dated, this the 3rd day of July, 2009

                              JUDGMENT

The challenge is against the coercive steps taken by the

respondents for realization of the tax arrears under the Motor Vehicles

(Taxation) Act. The case of the petitioner is that, he had submitted

necessary ‘G’ forms in respect of the quarter ended on 30.9.2002 and

31.12.2002. The stand of the department is that, on enquiry, it was

brought to light that the vehicle bearing No. KL13 B 1544 was very

much being operated by the petitioner during the aforesaid period and

hence no exemption was liable to be granted.

2. When the matter had came up for admission before this Court,

an interim stay was granted on condition that, the petitioner remitted

50% of the tax due. It is not brought to light, whether the said condition

has been complied with or not.

3. The matter was included in the weekly list commencing from

29.6.2009 and when it was taken up on that day, there was no

representation for the petitioner. To day also nobody has turned up on

behalf of the petitioner though it was taken up both in the forenoon and

afternoon. It appears that the petitioner is no more interested with the

cause of action projected in the present Writ Petition. Hence it is

dismissed for default.

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE
kmd