High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2024-02-01Writ petitions disposed of; provisional renewal...

Benazeer Riyas v. The Additional Registering Authority, Koduvally, Joint Regional Transport Office, Koyilandy and Muhammed Mahi Aboobacker

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) Nos.456/2022 and 44143/2023

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: N. Nagareesh
Judgment Date: 2024-02-01
Court Decision / Holding: W.P.(C) Nos.456/2022 & 44143/2023 disposed of. The Court held that the renewal of Fitness Certificate is for the vehicle's fitness and not dependent on ownership; considering the interim orders, the petitioners’ Fitness Certificate was provisionally renewed up to 24 January 2025 (and stated as 25 January 2025 in the order). The owner may pursue civil remedies if aggrieved; the matter of ownership disputes is left to appropriate proceedings.
Final Disposition: Writ petitions disposed of; provisional renewal of Fitness Certificate granted; ownership disputes to be pursued via civil remedies if necessary, with vehicle fitness renewal valid up to 25 January 2025.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Benazeer Riyas

Respondents

The Additional Registering Authority, Koduvally, Joint Regional Transport Office, Koyilandy P.O., Kozhikode-673572
Muhammed Mahi Aboobacker, S/o. Koiyam, Karuvarakode House, Manipuram P.O., Koduvally, Kozhikode-673572

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Neethu Soman
• K.V. Rashmi

Counsels for Respondents

• S. Gopinathan (Sr. Government Pleader)

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petitioners, Benazeer Riyas (and in a parallel matter Banazeer Riyas), are bonafide purchasers of a Heavy Goods Carriage Vehicle KL-57E-9076. They approached the Kerala High Court seeking to direct the 1st Respondent, the Additional Registering Authority at Koduvally, to accept renewal applications for Fitness Certificates and to inspect the vehicle, notwithstanding objections raised by the registered owner. WP(C) No.456/2022 sought renewal for 2022-23; WP(C) No.44143/2023 sought to direct provisional inspection and renewal to enable operation within a time-frame, specifically for 2023-24. When WP(C)44143/2023 came up on 03.01.2024, the Court issued urgent notice; on 11.01.2024 it directed provisional renewal in line with interim orders in similar cases. The petitioner contends that renewal of Fitness Certificate does not require the applicant to be the registered owner; Section 56 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 does not mandate ownership by the applicant, and relies on a Division Bench decision in Anil Kumar S. v. Secretary Regional Transport Authority Kollam (2010 (1) KLT 758). The Respondents' counsel opposed renewal, noting the interim orders and that ownership disputes require civil remedies. The Court observed that renewal pertains to the vehicle’s fitness, not ownership, and, in light of interim orders, provisionally renewed the Fitness Certificate up to 24 January 2025 (later stated as 25 January 2025) and disposed of the petitions, leaving the owner free to pursue redress if aggrieved.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 56 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that the objection of the registered owner need not be considered at the time of renewal of Fitness Certificate. Section 56 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 does not mandate that renewal applications must be submitted by the registered owner; reliance placed on Anil Kumar S. v. Secretary Regional Transport Authority Kollam (2010 (1) KLT 758).

Contentions of Respondents

The Respondents resisted renewal, citing ownership rights and the interim nature of provisional renewals; they note that civil remedies exist for ownership disputes and that renewal should not bypass ownership objections; interim orders were complied with in granting provisional renewal.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Anil Kumar S. v. Secretary Regional Transport Authority Kollam	2010 (1) KLT 758	Mentioned Only	Cited by petitioner in support of renewal argument; the court did not rely on its reasoning to deny or grant renewal in the final order.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Benazeer Riyas v. The Additional Registering Authority, Koduvally, Joint Regional Transport Office, Koyilandy and Muhammed Mahi Aboobacker and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH** **THURSDAY, THE 1[ST] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 12TH MAGHA, 1945** **WP(C) NO. 456 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER:** **BENAZEER RIYAS, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. KUNHAYANKUTTY, RIYAS MANZIL, NADUVANNUR, KOYILANDY, KOZHIKODE-673614.** **BY ADVS. SMT.NEETHU SOMAN SMT.RASHMI.K.V** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 THE ADDITIONAL REGISTERING AUTHORITY, KODUVALLY, JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, KOYILANDY P.O., KOZHIKODE-673572.** - **2 MUHAMMED MAHI ABOOBACKER, S/O. KOYAMU, KARUVARAKODE HOUSE, MANIPURAM P.O., KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE-673572.** **BY ADVS.** ## **SRI.S.GOPINATHAN, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).44143/2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C) Nos.456/2022 & 44143/2023 : 2 : ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH** **THURSDAY, THE 1[ST] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024/12TH MAGHA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 44143 OF 2023** ## **PETITIONER:** **BANAZEER RIYAS, AGED 44 YEARS, RIYAS MANZIL, NADUVANNUR, K OYILANDY, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673614** **BY ADV K.V.RASHMI** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRING AUTHORITY, KODUVALLY, JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, KOYILANDY P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673572** - **2 MUHAMMED MAHI ABOOBACKER, S/O KOYAMU, KARUVARAKODE HOUSE, MNIPURAM P.O., KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE., PIN – 673572** **BY ADVS.** ## **SRI.S.GOPINATHAN, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).456/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C) Nos.456/2022 & 44143/2023 : 3 : ## **JUDGMENT** Dated this the 1[st] day of February, 2024 [W.P.(C) Nos.456 of 2022 and 44143 of 2023] The petitioner, who is a bonafide purchaser of Heavy Goods Carriage Vehicle bearing registration No.KL-57E-9076, filed this writ petition seeking to direct the 1[st] respondent-Additional Registering Authority, Koduvally to accept the application for renewal of Fitness Certificate and inspect the vehicle KL-57E-9076 notwithstanding the objections raised by the registered owner, within a time frame. 2. W.P.(C) No.456 of 2022 was filed seeking Fitness Certificate for the year 2022-'23. Subsequently, the petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.44143 of 2023 seeking to direct the 1[st] respondent-Additional Registering Authority to inspect the vehicle KL-57E-9076 so as to enable the W.P.(C) Nos.456/2022 & 44143/2023 : 4 : petitioner to run and operate the vehicle within a time frame. The petitioner sought to direct the 1[st] respondent to accept application for renewal of Fitness Certificate in respect of the vehicle for the year 2023-'24. 3. When W.P.(C) No.44143 of 2023 came up for admission on 03.01.2024, this Court issued urgent notice on admission by speed post to the 2[nd] respondent, who is the registered owner of the vehicle. On 11.01.2024, taking into consideration the interim orders passed in similar cases, this Court directed the respondents that the application submitted by the petitioner for renewal of Fitness Certificate shall be provisionally accepted. 4. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the objection of the registered owner need not be considered at the time of renewal of Fitness Certificate as sought for by the petitioner. The statutory provision as far as renewal of Fitness Certificate is concerned, Section 56 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 doesn't mandate that the application for renewal of Fitness Certificate should be submitted by the W.P.(C) Nos.456/2022 & 44143/2023 : 5 : registered owner alone. The petitioner relied on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in _**AnilKumar S. v. Secretary Regional Transport Authority** ,_ _**Kollam** (2010 (1) KLT 758)_ in support of the petitioner's case. 5. Senior Government Pleader entered appearance and resisted the writ petitions filing a Statement. The Senior Government Pleader submitted that in W.P.(C) No.44143 of 2023, this Court passed an interim order inspite of objections of the respondents, directing the respondents to provisionally accept the application for renewal of Fitness Certificate of the petitioner. In fact, when the interim order was passed, there was pending application for renewal of Fitness Certificate. The petitioner produced application for renewal only on 25.01.2024. However, in deference to the orders of this Court, the respondents have considered the application and has allowed the application extending the period of Fitness Certificate up to 24.01.2025 provisionally. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader. W.P.(C) Nos.456/2022 & 44143/2023 : 6 : 7. The application of the petitioner is for renewal of Fitness Certificate. Though the petitioner submitted the application for renewal for the year 2023-'24 only on 25.01.2024, the respondents have, pursuant to the interim orders of this Court, now issued provisional Fitness Certificate which is valid up to 24.01.2025. Though notice has been issued to the 2[nd] respondent in the writ petition, there is no appearance by the 2[nd] respondent. 8. I find that the application submitted by the petitioner is only for a Fitness Certificate in respect of the vehicle. In the ordinary course, the fitness of a vehicle is not related to the ownership of the vehicle. If parties have any dispute regarding the ownership of the vehicle, they have to resort to appropriate Civil remedies for redressal of their grievances. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner's Fitness Certificate has been renewed till 25.01.2025, these writ petitions are disposed of recording the said submission. It will be open to the 2[nd] respondent to W.P.(C) Nos.456/2022 & 44143/2023 : 7 : agitate his grievance before appropriate forum, if he is aggrieved. Sd/- **N. NAGARESH JUDGE** SR W.P.(C) Nos.456/2022 & 44143/2023 : 8 : ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 456/2022** |**PETITIONER'S**|**EXHIBITS:**| |---|---| |**S**|| |**Exhibit P1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE RC BOOK OF KL-57 E**| ||**9076.**| |**Exhibit P2**|**TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED**| ||**17.9.2019.**| |**Exhibit P3**|**TRUE COPY OF THE FITNESS OF VEHICLE**| ||**KL-57 E 9076.**| |**Exhibit P4**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER EXTENDING**| ||**FITNESS BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT**| ||**DATED 30.9.2021.**| |**Exhibit P5**|**TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION IN 2010(1)**| ||**KLT 758.**| W.P.(C) Nos.456/2022 & 44143/2023 : 9 : ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 44143/2023** **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RC BOOK OF THE VEHICLE REGISTRATION NUMBER KL 57 E 9076** **Exhibit 2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 17-05-2019 AND ENGLISH TRANSLATION Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 17-05-2019 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WP(C)456/2022 DATED 07-01-2022 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CONDITION OF THE VEHICLE DOWNLOADED FROM THE PARIVAHAN SITE OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT**