TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1954
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....E-01) [Tribunal, MACT Petition No. 4791 of 2016] Saket Courts answered the question in the negative in a petition for compensation filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [MVA] by respondent no.1 herein. The High Court set aside this judgment and answered the question in the affirmative. Now we are called upon to adjudge the correctness of the view so taken. 3. Facts are of little relevance and so only a brief background as to how the question arose may suffice. On 5th September, 2013, respondent no.1 visited Inland Container Depot [ICD], Tughlakabad, New Delhi, when the vehicle in question hit him and ran over his pelvic region, leading to severe injuries. His right leg had to be amputated, for which he had to undergo several surgeries. Physical disability is 90%, which he claims to be at 100% as functional disability. Before the Tribunal, he sought Rs.75 lakhs. Respondent no. 3 (New India Assurance Co. Ltd.) objected to the claim through an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [CPC]. 4. This came to be allowed by the Tribunal on 9th January 2018, observing that Section 2(28) MVA makes it clear that there are two requiremen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....been attached and a trailer; but does not include a vehicle running upon fixed rails or a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises or a vehicle having less than four wheels fitted with engine capacity of not exceeding twenty-five cubic centimetres; (34) "public place" means a road, street, way or other place, whether a thoroughfare or not, to which the public have a right of access, and includes any place or stand at which passengers are picked up or set down by a stage carriage" 8. A bare perusal of the above reveals that for a particular machine to be counted as a motor vehicle, it must be (a) mechanically propelled, (b) adapted to be used on roads, irrespective of whether such vehicle which may have an internal or external power propulsion source; a chassis which may or may not have a body attached to it and a trailer. What does not constitute a motor vehicle, is (a) a vehicle running on fixed rails or (b) a vehicle of special type adapted for use only in a factory or other enclosed premises or (c) a vehicle with less than four wheels along with engine capacity less than....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the same would be an enclosed premise and not a 'public place'." 11. Undisputedly, a road is a public space granted that public has access thereto. Whether authorized personnel can be termed to be public? The Section uses the words 'thoroughfare or not' which already indicates restricted access but given the nature of work that is carried out inside these areas, which, as it appears is movement of heavy machinery or shipping containers that too on specially designed roads. Keeping in view the weight of the vehicles plied thereon, it cannot be said that any person walking on the roads outside this area, can, as a matter of right claim entry to this space. Since the ICD is a custom bonded area within the meaning of Section 7 of the Indian Customs Act 1962, i.e. the place for unloading and loading of goods imported and exported, it only stands to reason that only those persons who are duly authorized by the competent authority will have access to the same. This fortifies the conclusion that it is not a place that public has a right to access. As such, the roads within ICD, to our view do not constitute 'public place' as defined under Section 2 (34) of the MVA. 12. Now turning to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....flats made into a chain such as a caterpillar vehicle or a military tank. Both move from one place to another but are not suitable for use on roads. It is not that they cannot move on the roads but that they are not adapted, made fit or suitable for use on roads. They would, if used, dig and damage the roads. It is contended that the dumpers or rockers are very heavy and though they can move on roads they would damage the roads and, therefore, they are not suitable for use on roads. To substantiate this proposition the appellants have produced before us certain notifications issued by the State of Orissa under which vehicles beyond a certain laden weight are prohibited from plying on the roads. It was rightly pointed out by the learned advocate for the State of Orissa that there are only some of the roads on which vehicles, heavier than what is indicated in the notification cannot be permitted. But that is not to say that all vehicles which exceed a particular weight are not adapted for use upon roads and are, therefore, not motor vehicles. ... 37. From the very nature of the area operated by these three companies it is obvious that the machines which are the subject-matte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....herefore the interpretation given by K.T. Thomas J., for a three judge Bench becomes important. It is as follows: "10. A close reading of the definition of "motor vehicle" in Item 34 reveals that the striking ingredient thereof is that it should have been "adapted for use upon roads". Merely because the areas on which such heavy-movers traverse might sometimes include roads also is not enough to hold that they were "adapted for use upon roads". Such use of the heavy-mover on the road may only be ancillary or incidental to the main use of it. Emphasis in the definition must be on the words "use upon road" as those words would denote the principal or dominant use and not where it may move incidentally." 13.2.1 Appellant's case: As is obvious from the above, determination of dominant use hinges on utility. It is not used on roads is the appellant's pleaded case. Its transportation is only done after it is dismantled, for doing so without it is impossible for it contravenes weight limits. 13.2.2 Respondent's case: Dismantling of a Reach Stacker falls within operational economics and is not the determinant of suitability since many other vehicles are transported in this m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... are of special type and have been adapted for use only in factory or in any other enclosed premises from its ambit. 38. The vehicles in question used by the appellant are all in the nature of special vehicles as they are basically construction equipment vehicles which have been made suitable for use only in a factory and an enclosed premises rather than for use on roads. These vehicles may be capable of being used on road but essentially, they are meant to be used as a special vehicle inside the enclosed premises or in the factory premises alone and not outside on the road. Even for reaching the factory premises, or the so-called enclosed premises they do not ply on road and are taken on tractors and trailers from the place of their manufacturing to the place of their deployment. The various certificates of the manufacturers and suppliers as well as those issued by the Automotive Research Association of India amply demonstrate that the aforesaid vehicles used by the appellant are special type of vehicles meant for use only within the factory premises or the enclosed premise. They are all off-road vehicles that do not ordinarily ply on roads. Since, they do not run on the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he second part. To drive home the point, an analogy was drawn with airplanes and tanks, observing that even though they are suitable to land/use on roads, to accept this as the deciding factor would lead to an anomaly. It is stated that the area where the Reach Stacker was driven was a 'paved internal road' of the ICD. We may only ask ourselves as to how this road would be any different from the roads on which the vehicles discussed in this judgment, i.e., roads within enclosed industrial areas? 13.4 We now deal with the judgments cited by the amicus to support the case of respondent no.1 and how they are sought to be distinguished by the learned senior counsel for the appellant: 13.4.1 Central Coal Fields Ltd. v. State of Orissa 1992 Supp (3) SCC 133, was relied on to contend that plying Dumpers etc on roads would cause damage to the roads, would not on its own make them unsuitable for use on roads. In the present facts, it was argued by the other side that reach stackers cannot ply on roads whatsoever, irrespective of the fact that they are with rubber wheels. 13.4.2 Bose Abraham v. State of Kerala (2001) 3 SCC 157, a co-ordinate Bench held that merely because there is a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons to the contrary cited at the Bar starting from Travancore Tea Estates Co. Ltd. v. State of Kerala, Union of India v. Chowgule and Co. Pvt. Ltd., Central Coal Fields Ltd. v. State of Orissa, Chief General Manager, Jagannath Area (supra), Bose Abraham v. State of Kerala, State of Gujarat (supra) are all decisions of the different Division Benches of this Court. No doubt, they hold that vehicles used or kept for use on the public roads of the State are exigible to tax, and if they are not so used they can claim exemption but all these decisions fail to take into account the specific exclusion as contained in the second part of Section 2(28) of the Act which defines "motor vehicles". As stated earlier, the vehicles or the construction equipment vehicles used by the appellants are "motor vehicles" within the first part of the definition as contained in Section 2(28) but they stand excluded by virtue of the second part of the said definition. This aspect of the matter has not been specifically considered by any of the above decisions. Moreover, all these decisions simply brushes aside Bolani Ores Ltd. (supra) without actually ruling it out on the ground that it relates to "motor vehi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Model REACH STACKER LOAD CONTAINER HANDLER bearing serial no...(illegible)... having ...(illegible)...kgs with front axle 4 tyres 4x(15x25) tubeless. The gross vehicle weight is ...(illegible)... the tyre size...(illegible)... is not prescribed in the Motor Vehicle Act 1988 under Rules there under. Similarly, the loads specified to the first axle and rear axles are not prescribed under the MV Rules, 1989. As such the vehicle cannot be operated on public road. This vehicle is of a special...(illegible)...manufactured and adopted to be used only in enclosed premises not as such...(illegible)...does not come under the definition of Motor vehicle as prescribed under rule 2(28) of Motor Vehicle Act of 1988. Since this reach stacker is not a motor vehicle. It does not require registration under sec 39 of MV Act, 1988. (Sign) JOINT TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER & SECRETARY RTA HYDERABAD" 15. The Amicus Curiae' answer to this is that mere non-registration is not a reason to escape liability and the consequence that is posited of such argument being accepted is that every unregistered vehicle would be removed from the scope of this Act. It i....