TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court Limits Special Permits for Contract Carriages</h1> <h3>A SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, BANGALORE AND ANOT Versus D.P. SHARMA AND OTHERS</h3> A SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, BANGALORE AND ANOT Versus D.P. SHARMA AND OTHERS - 1989 AIR 509, 1988 (3) Suppl. SCR 1038, 1989 (1) Suppl. SCC ... Issues Involved:1. Whether a special permit u/s 63(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act can be granted after the coming into force of the Karnataka Contract Carriages (Acquisition) Act, 1976.2. Interpretation of the term 'contract carriage' u/s 3(g) of the Act.3. Validity of the prohibition on the issuance of new permits or renewal of existing permits for contract carriages u/s 14 and 20(3) of the Act.Summary:Issue 1: Grant of Special Permit u/s 63(6) of the Motor Vehicles ActThe primary issue was whether a special permit u/s 63(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act could be granted after the Karnataka Contract Carriages (Acquisition) Act, 1976 came into force. The Supreme Court held that the Act prohibits the issuance of such permits. The High Court's view that a public service vehicle without a special permit when the Act came into force would not fall under the definition of 'contract carriage' was incorrect. The Act's intention was to prevent misuse and provide better transport facilities, thus barring the grant of special permits post-enactment.Issue 2: Definition of 'Contract Carriage' u/s 3(g) of the ActThe term 'contract carriage' u/s 3(g) of the Act includes public service vehicles with special permits issued u/s 63(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Supreme Court clarified that the words 'has been issued' in clauses (i) and (ii) of section 3(g) refer to permits issued after the Act's commencement. The exclusion clause (ii) of section 3(g) excludes stage carriages with special permits in force on January 30, 1976, from the definition of 'contract carriage.'Issue 3: Prohibition on Issuance of Permits u/s 14 and 20(3) of the ActSection 14, read with section 20(3) of the Act, bars the issuance or renewal of permits for running any contract carriage, thereby conferring a monopoly on the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation. The Supreme Court rejected the argument that the prohibition only applied to contract carriages and not stage carriages. The interpretation that the word 'permit' in section 3(m) refers solely to permits for contract carriages under the Motor Vehicles Act was deemed incorrect. The Act's provisions aim to prevent the issuance of permits for running vehicles as contract carriages, whether they are contract carriages or stage carriages.Conclusion:The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court's judgment, and dismissed the writ petition filed by the respondent. The decision reinforced the prohibition on granting special permits for contract carriages post-enactment of the Karnataka Contract Carriages (Acquisition) Act, 1976.
TaxTMI 