Mohammed Navas C.T. v. State of Kerala and Others

## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 10[TH] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 21ST MAGHA, 1943 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 800 OF 2022`** ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` MOHAMMED NAVAS C.T., AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. YOOSAF HAJI, CHETTIYARTHODI-JAZZ VILLA, KURUVATTOOR, VALLAPUZHA-679336. ``` ``` BY ADVS.LEO LUKOSE ENOCH DAVID SIMON JOEL S.SREEDEV RONY JOSE SUZANNE KURIAN CIMIL CHERIAN KOTTALIL ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695001.`** - **`2 THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, MINI CIVIL STATION, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD, PIN – 679303.`** - **`3 THE TAHSILDAR, PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN – 679102.`** - **`4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PATTAMBI TALUK, VALLAPUZHA VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN – 679336.`** ## **`BY ADV.SMT.RESMITHA RAMACHANDRAN, GP`** ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 800 OF 2022 ``` ``` -2- ``` ## **`JUDGMENT`** ``` The petitioner has purchased a 'Range Rover Evoque SD 4 Car' in his name and got it registered at Pondicherry with Reg.No.PY-01-CN-0777. The petitioner now wants the vehicle to be transferred to the jurisdiction of the Registering Authority at Pattambi, Kerala and has received No Objection Certificate from the Registering Authority at Pondicherry for the said purpose. ``` ``` 2.On a request from the petitioner, by Ext. P2 letter, the 2[nd]respondent has intimated the petitioner the amounts to be remitted towards motor vehicle tax, additional tax, interest, fees along with penalty for re-registering the vehicle at the Registering Authority, Pattambi. ``` ``` 3.The petitioner states that he is ready to remit all the taxes, interest, fees and penalty as required in Ext. P2; however, due to severe financial constraints, he is not in a position to remit the entire tax amount at a time. Accordingly, the ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 800 OF 2022 ``` ``` -3- ``` ``` petitioner has filed this writ petition for direction to the respondents to permit him to remit the entire motor vehicle tax, additional tax, interest, fees along with penalty with respect to the car having Reg.No. PY-01-CN-0777, in installments. ``` ``` 4.The prayer of the petitioner is resisted by Smt.Resmitha Ramachandran, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents contending that the re-registration of vehicle on transfer to the jurisdiction of the Registering Authority in Kerala can be done only on confirmation of remittance of the motor vehicle tax, additional tax along with interest, fees and penalty on a one-time basis. Smt.Resmitha also submits that there is no provision in the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 (the 'Act', for short) for payment of tax for registration or re-registration of vehicles in installments and the prayer for installments cannot be granted in view of the express provisions of the Act and no mandamus could be sought to direct the respondents to do something which is contrary to law. Smt.Resmitha also ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 800 OF 2022 ``` ``` -4- ``` ``` relies on the Division Bench judgment of the High Court of Madras in Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. Empee Distilleries Ltd.[2017 SCC OnLine Madras 35229]in support of her contentions wherein paragraph 38 reads as follows: ``` ``` “38. Statute does not provide payment of tax in installments and therefore, respondent has no right to seek for payment of tax in installments and consequently, no mandamus can be issued. Reference can be made to few decisions, as to when a writ of mandamus, can be issued. ``` ``` (i) In Oriental Bank of Commerce v. Sunder Lal Jain reported in (2008) 2 SCC 280, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, at paragraphs 11 and 12, held thus, ``` ``` "11. The principles on which a writ of mandamus can be issued have been stated as under in The Law of Extraordinary Legal Remedies by F.G. Ferris and F.G. Ferris, Jr.: ``` ``` Note 187.-Mandamus, at common law, is a highly prerogative writ, usually issuing out of the highest court of general jurisdiction, in the name of the sovereignty, directed to any naturalperson,corporationor inferiorcourtwithinthe jurisdiction, requiring them to do someparticularthingtherein specified, and which appertains to their office or duty. Generally speaking, it may be said that mandamus is a summary writ, issuing from the proper court, commanding the official or board to which it is addressed to perform some specific legal duty to which the party applying for the writ is entitled of legal right to have performed. ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 800 OF 2022 ``` ``` -5- ``` ``` Note 192.-Mandamus is, subject to the exercise of a sound judicial discretion, the appropriate remedy to enforce a plain, positive, specific andministerialdutypresently existing and imposed by law upon officers and others who refuse or neglect to perform such duty, when there is no other adequate and specific legal remedy and without which there would be a failure of justice. The chief function of the writ is to compel the performance of public duties prescribed by statute, and to keep subordinate and inferior bodies and tribunals exercising public functions within their jurisdictions. It is not necessary, however, that the duty be imposed by statute; mandamus lies as well for the enforcement of a common law duty. ``` ``` Note 196.-Mandamus is not a writ of right. Its issuance unquestionably lies in the sound judicial discretion of the court, subject always to the well-settled principles which have been established by the courts. An action in mandamus is not governed by the principles of ordinary litigation where the matters alleged on one side and not denied on the other are taken as true, and judgment pronounced thereon as of course. While mandamus is classed as a legal remedy, its issuance is largely controlled by equitable principles. Before granting the writ the court may, and should, look to the larger public interest which may be concerned-an interest which private litigants are apt to overlook when striving for private ends. The court should act in view of all the existing facts, and with due regard to the consequences which will result. It is in every case a discretion dependent upon all the surrounding facts and circumstances.” ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 800 OF 2022 ``` ``` -6- ``` ``` Smt.Resmitha also points out that, the sole ground on which the petitioner seeks for installment facility is his alleged financial constraints, which is not substantiated by pleadings in the writ petition. Smt.Resmitha further submits that the petitioner is not a taxi driver or such other person in the economically weaker strata of the Society who cannot afford to pay the tax and instructions have been received from the respondents that the petitioner is living in sound financial background and has other luxury vehicles. ``` ``` 5.Sri.Leo Lukose, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, submits that the petitioner is not disputing the amount of taxes, interest, fine or penalty demanded for re- registration, but only seeks an installment facility to pay the taxes in view of the financial crisis as his business is in heavy loss. According to Sri.Leo, only after the payment of the entire installments, if any, permitted by this Court, the Registering Authority will re-register the vehicle and therefore, ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 800 OF 2022 ``` ``` -7- ``` ``` no prejudice is caused to the respondents by permitting the petitioner to pay the tax in installments. Sri.Leo also submits that the fine and penalty accrued only due to delay on the part of the respondents in considering his objections to the show cause notice against levy of tax. ``` ``` 6.I have considered the rival submissions. The ground on which the petitioner seeks installment facility for remitting the taxes is his financial crisis, which is not substantiated. Except for the mere ipse dixit statement of the petitioner in the writ petition that he is in financial crisis and cannot remit the entire tax amount, there are no materials to substantiate the same. Inwrit petitions, not only the facts but also the evidence in proof of such factsis to be pleaded and produced. ``` ``` The re-registration of a vehicle on transfer to the jurisdiction of the Registering Authority in Kerala can be done only on remittance of the motor vehicle tax on a one-time basis. It is a condition necessary for re-registering the vehicle. The Act ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 800 OF 2022 ``` ``` -8- ``` ``` does not provide for payment of such tax in installments. Accordingly, the petitioner has no right to seek payment of the said tax in installments and no writ of mandumus could be issued for payment of tax in installments.In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to exercise any discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in favour of the petitioner. This writ petition fails and accordingly, it is dismissed.No order as to costs. ``` ``` Sd/- MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE ``` ``` akv ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 800 OF 2022 ``` ``` -9- ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 800/2022`** ## **`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`** ``` EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NUMBERED AS R2- 6404/2018 DATED 25.09.2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ``` ``` EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NUMBERED AS C 4/870/2021/PP DATED 15.11.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ``` ## **`RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.`** ``` //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ```