K T KATHIRI Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER KOZHIKODE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A number of cases on the point raised in this writ application have come up before me and I find that the Regional Transport Officer and the appellate authority, the District Collector have proceeded on the basis that there is tax liability for a vehicle for a given period if there has been no compliance with the provisions of S.5 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963. This is a misconception. S.5 of this Act is in these terms:

(2.) This provision is made in S.5 apparently because of the legal fiction introduced by sub-s.2 of S.3 which provides :

(3.) Ext. P2, the order passed by the Regional Transport Officer and the order passed by the appellate authority the Collector, Ext. P3, proceed on the basis that there is tax liability for a vehicle for a given period if there has been no compliance with S.5. According to the appellate authority, there should be a prior intimation stating the period for which the vehicle was not intended to be used. Merely because the enabling provision contained in S.5 is not available to a registered owner it does not necessarily follow that the tax must be paid for the vehicle even if he has not used or kept for use the vehicle for the period in question. This question in each case must be investigated and determined if a claim is made that there has been no user and that the vehicle was not kept for use.