L VENU Vs. ASSISTANT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the endorsement dated 28-6-1993 issued to the petitioner by the registering authority in respect of his notice under sub-section (1) of Section 52 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). Before dealing with the contentions advanced by the petitioner, it is relevant to advert to the various provisions governing the alteration in Motor Vehicle. Section 52 of the Act reads:

(2.) The petitioner being aggrieved of the aforesaidendorsement issued by the authority has challenged the legality of the order and has sought the following reliefs:

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contends thatendorsement impugned cannot be legality sustained since the alteration sought for is only for conversion of maxi cab into motor cab by reducing seating capacity from 12+1 to 6+1, which is in conformity with the definition of motor cab as defined under sub-section (25) of Section 2 of the Act. The learned counsel for the peat) hner invites this court's attention to the ratio decidendi