(1.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that there is no merit is this appeal.
(2.) The sole contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the observations of the learned Single Judge that there was no issue, no pleading and no evidence about the finding that Jeep was used for taxi purpose as arrived at by the MACT is erroneous.
(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant for this purpose relies on framing of issue No. 3 and discussion made therein.