K HAMZA Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER KOZHIKOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We find no merit in the Writ Appeal because appellant is the registered owner liable to pay motor vehicle tax, no matter tax could be recovered from those in possession and control of the vehicle. If vehicle is available and value of such vehicle is sufficient to cover the tax liability, then certainly vehicle should be seized and sold.

(2.) If appellant gives particulars of the place where the vehicle is garaged, then on production of this judgment, and such particulars by the appellant to the Station House Officer of the police station within whose jurisdiction, the vehicle is found available, the vehicle should be seized by the Sub Inspector of Police, and handed over to the first respondent for sale and recovery of tax. However, this direction will not stand in the way of recovery of tax from the appellant, who is liable as registered owner.

(3.) Writ Appeal is dismissed with the above direction.