SUNDARAM FINANCE LTD Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition for writ, the petitioner seeks to question the assessment order and the consequential demand notice dt. 13.03.2006 (Annex. 10) as issued under the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1951 ( 'the Act of 1951 ').

(2.) ON background facts, the petitioner has averred that as a finance company, it had extended hire purchase finance facility to the respondent No. 3 in relation to a vehicle bearing Registration No. RJ -30 -P -0378; and, for the respondent No. 3 having defaulted in payment of installments, it had repossessed the vehicle on 23.02.2000 without receiving any documents i.e., the certificates of registration, insurance, fitness, permit, token etc. It is the case of the petitioner that under the communications dt. 19.02.2000 and 17.03.2000, the requisite information regarding re -possession was given to the Regional Transport Officer, Rajsamand. It is further alleged that the Regional Transport Officer was informed under the communication dt. 15.03.2000 (Annex.5) about the vehicle having been repossessed on 23.02.2000 and having been parked at Mumbai and vehicle having not been put on the road from the date of stoppage. It is further alleged that on 11.10.2000, the petitioner ultimately sold out the vehicle on 'as is where is' basis to one Mr. S.I. Khuddus who took the delivery of the vehicle on 14.10.2000 from M/s Kamal Towing, Chembur, Mumbai.

(3.) ASSAILING the said action on the part of the respondents, this writ petition was filed on 25.04.2006 and herein, notices were ordered to be issued to the respondents to show cause as to why the petition be not admitted on 29.05.2006. The petition remained pending for long awaiting service on all the respondents particularly in relation to the respondent No. 4, the alleged guarantor; and for want of compliance of the peremptory order dt. 28.08.2008, the petition has been dismissed against the said respondent No. 4.