- Court
- High Court of Gauhati
- Decided
- 5 September 2024
- Bench
- Sanjay Kumar Medhi
- Case no.
- WP(C) 4457/2024
Judgment
ORDER 06-09-2024 Heard Shri S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. D. Borah, learned Standing Counsel, Transport Department. Considering the subject matter in dispute and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the motion stage. The instant petition has been filed with the grievance that the Regional Transport Officer, Kamrup (M) has not taken any steps for cancellation of the Registration Certificate of the vehicle of the petitioner. It is projected that a vehicle (HYUNDAI CRETA) bearing Registration No. AS-01 EA-6935 owned by the petitioner had fallen into a canal on 20.07.2023 and was severely damaged. The matter was enquired by the Insurance Company and the IRDAI had issued a report regarding the permanent damage of the vehicle in question and the Insurance Company had also issued a letter to the RTO for cancellation of the registration. Shri Borthakur, the learned counsel has submitted that the requirement of Section 55 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is substantially complied with as the report has already been forwarded by the Insurance Company. Ms. Borah, the learned Standing Counsel has however submitted that under Section 55, there is a requirement and obligation on the part of the owner to report the fact to the Registering Authority regarding the damage of the vehicle or that it has been rendered permanently incapable of use. In this regard, the learned Standing Counsel has placed before this Court written Page No.# 3/3 instructions with a forwarding letter dated 31.08.2024 as per which it transpires that the petitioner owner has not fulfilled his part of the obligation under Section 55. The learned Standing Counsel has also informed that the communication alleged to have been sent by the Insurance Company has not been received till now. Considering the facts and circumstances and the respective contentions, this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be served by directing the petitioner to submit an application reporting the fact regarding damage of the vehicle along with the report of the Insurance Company whereafter the authority envisaged under Section 55 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 would take necessary action and pass a speaking order. Writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Copy of the written instructions placed by Ms. Borah, the learned Standing Counsel is made part of the records.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Case details
Parties and counsel
PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010179752024 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/4457/2024o SASHANKAoBRAHMAo S/O-oLATEoUTTAMoCH.oBRAHMA,oR/O-oVILL-oDAHALAPARA,oP.O.o KHAGRABARI,oP.S.oKAJALGAON,oDIST.-oCHIRANGo(BTAD),oASSAM VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo2oORSo REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEo GOVERNMENToOFoASSAM,oTRANSPORToDEPARTMENT,oGOVT.oOFoASSAM,o DISPUR,oGUWAHATI-o781006 2:THEoREGIONALoTRANSPORToOFFICER oBETKUCHI oGUWAHATI-o781034 oDIST.-oKAMRUPo(M) oASSAM 3:NATIONALoINSURANCEoCOMPANY oREPRESENTEDoBYoITSoAUTHORISEDoSIGNATORY oDIVISIONALoIN-CHARGE oGUWAHATIoREGIONALoOFFICE oG.S.ROAD oBHANGAGARH oGUWAHATI-o78100o AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMRoSoBORTHAKUR,oMS.oPoBORAHo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oSC,oTRANSPORToDEPARTMENT,oASSAM,oo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.