RASIKLAL DAMJIBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LAWS(GJH)-1988-12-4
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on December 28,1988

RASIKLAL DAMJIBHAI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

RAMKRISHNA BUS TRANSPORT VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-1994-6-3] [REFERRED TO]
RAMKRISHNA BUS TRANSPORT VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-1994-6-3] [RELIED ON]


JUDGEMENT

R.J.SHAH - (1.)Appellants herein filed Special Civil Application No. 6747 of 1988 challenging the alleged arbitrary and illegal action of the respondents their agents and servants in detaining and seizing their motor vehicles in the purported exercise of the powers under Sec. 129A of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 (Act No. 4 of 1939) (hereinafter referred to as the Act for the sake of bravity). Said petition came to be rejected by a single Judge of this Court by order dated 13-10-1988. Being aggrieved by the said order of rejection the appellants have come by way of this Letters Patent Appeal.
(2.)Appellant No. 1 who is the registered owner of two luxury buses obtained special permits as contemplated under Sec. 63(6) of the Act. Appellant No. 2 is the registered owner of five vehicles out of which for one vehicle he holds All India Tourist Permit. So far as the remaining four vehicles are concerned Appellant No. 2 also obtained special permits under Sec. 63(6) of the Act. For the purpose of the vehicle holding the All India Tourist permit Appellant No. 2 obtained National Permit under the provisions of Sec. 63(7) of the Act. Appellant No. 3 who is the registered owner of four luxury buses also obtained special permit under Sec. 63(6) of the Act. All the appellants alleged that they are running their buses without stopping to pike up or set down along the line of route passengers from one destination to another destination.
(3.)The reliefs prayed in the petition insofar as they are relevant for the present purpose of the Letters Patent Appeal are as under:
(A) for the issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction restraining the respondents their agents and servants including the authorised officers both of Motor Vehicles Department and the Police Department under Sec. 129A of the Act not to seize and detain the petitioners omnibuses under Sec 129 of the Act if actually covered under the current Special Permit or the National Permit granted under sub-sec. 16) and/or sub-sec. (7) of Sec. 63 of the Act on the ground that the passengers had paid individually for their travel and/or the names and addresses of the passengers differ from the names and addresses of the passengers list;

(B) for the insurance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or direction directing the respondents their agents and servants not to keep the passengers out of such vehicles and to seize or detain the vehicle.

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.