Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SANTOSH KUMAR MAURYA versus REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER/TAXATION OFFICER KANPUR & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Santosh Kumar Maurya v. Regional Transport Officer/Taxation Officer Kanpur & Others - WRIT TAX No. 634 of 2006 [2007] RD-AH 8703 (8 May 2007)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Chief Justice's Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 634 of 2006

1. Santosh Kumar Maurya son of ri Jagdish Prasad Maurya,

  resident of 214/11, Vijai Nagar Subzimandi, Kanpur Nagar

Versus

1. Regional Transport Officer/Taxation Officer Kanpur,

Regional Transport Office, Kanpur.

2. Zila Adhikari Kanpur Nagar.

     

****

Counsel for the petitioner:    Mr. M.A. Khan

Counsel for the respondents:  Mr. M.R. Jaiswal, Standing Counsel

****

CORAM: Hon'ble H.L.Gokhale,CJ

Hon'ble R.K. Agrawal,J

Dated: May 8, 2007

Oral Judgement:(Per:H.L.Gokhale,CJ)

1. Heard Mr. Khan, learned counsel in support of this petition.

2. The petitioner is challenging the recovery of tax in pursuance of the recovery certificate dated 26th of November, 2005.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the concerned vehicle met with an accident and thereafter it was sold to scrap dealer. If that was so, the petitioner would have disclosed what was the amount received by him. He does not mention it nor does the scrap dealer mention. The papers of registration of the vehicle are also not tendered to the authority concerned.

4. In the circumstances, there is no reason to interfere into the order of the recovery certificate nor can we direct the cancellation of registration under Section 55 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 as prayed by the petitioner. The petition is dismissed.

Date:8.5.2007

RK/        (Chief Justice)

                                        (R.K. Agrawal, J)


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.