S.R.RAMAKRISHNAN Vs. DEPUTY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of Certiorari to call for the records on the file of the first respondent in Sa.Mu.No.1859/A3/2012, dated 5.10.2012 and the records relating to the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.48943/A2/2011, dated 2.2.2012 and quash the same.

(2.) 2.1. The brief facts, according to the petitioner, are as follows: One A.K.Palanisamy, maternal uncle of the petitioner, was owning Toyota Innova Car bearing registration No.TN-38-AZ-5000. On 3.1.2011, he executed a sale-cum-delivery receipt in respect of the above stated vehicle in favour of the petitioner. He also executed a Will in respect of other properties movable and immovable, of which we are not concerned for the present.

(3.) 3.1. Mr.R.Muthukumarasamy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner relying upon Section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity, "the MV Act, 1988") stated that the ownership of the vehicle stood transferred on 3.1.2011 when the sale-cum-delivery receipt was issued by the said A.K.Palanisamy and on the date when the hypothecation with the bank was discharged and Form-35 was issued by the bank acknowledging the receipt of the payment in discharge of the hypothecation. It is only after transfer of ownership of the vehicle by the above stated sale-cum-delivery receipt and bank discharge that the petitioner sought for change of ownership in the registration certificate and that was recorded in terms of Section 50(1) of the MV Act, 1988. The petitioner became the owner of the vehicle on 3.1.2011 itself and it is only on 12.1.2011 the said A.K.Palanisamy died.