KASHI NATH PANDEY,J. - (1.) WE have heard Shri Rakesh Chandra Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.C. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel appears for the State respondents.
(2.) THIS writ petition is directed against the citation issued by the Tehsildar, Duddhi, District Sonebhadra dated 23.7.2011 for recovery of Rs. 40, 313/- and other dues of the vehicle tax, on the recovery certificate issued under Section 20 of the Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1997. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the vehicle was financed by M/s Tata Motor Finance Limited, with its head office at Mumbai, and regional office at Baidhan, District Siddhi, Madhya Pradesh in the year 2004. On 20.3.2007 at 04.10 p.m. the representatives of Tata Motor Finance Company repossessed the vehicle for non-payment of the instalments. The petitioner was not in a financial position to pay the dues of the finance company, and to get the vehicle released. He thus paid the vehicle tax upto 31.3.1997, and claims the payment of tax as collateral proof of repossession of the vehicle. It is alleged that all the papers were also taken over by the finance company, and that since thereafter the petitioner is not in possession of the vehicle. He states that the vehicle may have been sold by the finance company to some other person and thus he is not liable to pay the vehicle tax.
(3.) A supplementary affidavit has been filed by the petitioner annexing therewith a letter dated 27.3.2007 sent to the Assistant Regional Transport Officer, Sonebhadra informing him that the vehicle was repossessed on 20.3.2007, and that after delivery of re-possession letter and that the petitioner did not want to ply the vehicle. He also sent a representation on 10.8.2011, after receipt of citation, stating that the vehicle was repossessed on 20.3.2007, and disputing his liability to pay the tax.;