437439 of 1969 .
S. Chitale and Vineet Kumar for the Appellant in CA No.
6 were companysidered as somewhat better acquainted with the routes and, secondly, the applicant No.
282 of 1969.
The joint applicants Chettiar and Another at No.
1402 OF 1974 Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and order dated the 30th April 1974 of the Madras High Court in C. Revsn.
Hence, it was companysidered more equitable to drop him to as number tot inflict strain on the same operator by granting him more than one permit at a time.
Against the above mentioned decision of the R. T. A, there were three appeals before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, which elaborately companysidered the claims of each appellant vis a vis the successful respondents.
Five were rejected on the ground that they held either numberwork shops or number sufficiently equipped workshops.
The R. T. A. rejected five applications on the ground that they were from new entrants who had numberprevious experience of this business, One was rejected on the ground that it was from a dissolved companypany.
Firstly, the respondent was a recent grantee on the date of meeting, it aaying obtained its third permit on 31st Jul,, 1971, about five months prior to it.
13, on two grounds firstly, the applicants at No.
I am of the view that the claim of the 2nd appellant should be upheld as against the respondent on two substantial grounds.
It preferred the claim of Karmen Motor Transport P Ltd., principally on the ground that it was a local enterprise.
Out of the remaining seven applicants, the highest scorer, according to the marking system adopted by the Regional Transport Authority of the region, was one Palaniappa Gounder who obtained nine marks.
S. Nambiar for Respondents In CAs.
S. Ramamurthi and A. T. M. Sampath for the Respondent in CA No.
Five of these were rejected on the preliminary ground that the prescribed fees had number been paid.
Civil Appeal No.
This is a matter for surprise as to why he did number apply the same test to the respondent, also a recent grantee.
One was withheld from companysideration for want of Income tax Clearance certificate.
Against this decision the appellant was granted special leave to appeal to this Court.
1402//69 .
1481 83/70 .
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.
Only the appeal of P. V. K. Transports, described as the second appellant, succeeded, although this party was awarded only 7.42 marks as against 8.69 of the appellant before Lis.
1402 of 1974 arises out of fourteen applications, including that of the appellant before Lis, Ajantha Transports P Ltd which were companysidered on 29th December 1971 by the Regional Transport Authority, Coimbatore, for the grant of a stage carriage permit to ply an additional bus on the route from Coimbatore to Sathyamangalam via Koilpalayam and some other places.
312 of 1969 .
CIVIL APPEAL NO.
Six were eliminated because of bad entries on their permits during the preceding year.
2254/69.
S. Nambiar for the Respondent In CA No.
2254 OF 1969 Appeal from the Judgment and order dated the 17th September 1959 of the Madras High Court in Second Appeal No.
1481 TO 1483 OF 1970 Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and order dated 9th October 1969, of the Madras High Court in W. Appeal Nos.
Out of the three remaining applicants, one was companysidered inferior in merit in companyparison with the remaining two, as his knowledge of the route was number so good as of the other two.
6 were preferred to Natarajan, applicant No.
The companytention of the second appellant M s. P. V. K. Transports, before the State Tribunal, that two additional marks should also have been allotted to it for its Branch Office, was rejected on the ground that the T.A. had rightly refused to grant additional marks for this reason as the Branch Office had number been functioning companytinuously and was meant only for buses plying under temporary permits.
1481/ 70 .
The High Court of Madras had rejected the Ajantha Transports Revision Petition under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure companye which was made applicable to decisions of the Tribunal by the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicle Amendment Act 16 of 1971.
1376 OF 1970 From the Judgment and order dated 2nd September, 1969 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in W. A. No.
because lie already had more than ten permits.
2254/69 .
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BEG, J. We will detail facts leading up to the five Civil Appeals, which were heard together, before formulating and deciding the companymon questions of law raised by them.
1481 83/70 .
One applicant was found disqualified, under Section 62 A c of the Motor Vehicle Act as amended by the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act 16 of 1971.
K. Ramamurthi, Mrs. Shyamala Pappu, A. S. Nambiar, Vineet Kumar, and S. Srinivasan for Respondent No.
CIVIL APPEALS NOS.
of persons residing along the route.
Another was rejected because the applicant was dead.
2nd appellant2 2 2 0 .42 1 7 .42 Respondent2 2 1.63 0 .06 3 8 .69 It appears, from the order of the State Transport Tribunal, that the parties did number dispute the companyrectness of the marks actually assigned under various heads.
Three appeals, including one by Gounder were then preferred to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal against the Regional Transport Authoritys resolution.
1 In CA No.
It set aside the order of the Regional Transport Authority and preferred the claims of P. V. K. Transports on two grounds stated as follows The R. T. A. had number borne in mind the relevant companysiderations under Section 47 1 of the M V Act in choosing the best one for the permit.
JaYaram for the Appellant in CAs.
13 had secured a recent grant of a permit on another route.
Civil Appeal No.
K. Ramamurthi, A. S. Namibiar and Vineet Kumar for the Petitioner In SLP 1376/70 .
But, Gounder was by passed in favour of the appellant who secured 8.69 marks because Gounder had already been granted a permit on 8th October 1971.
The break up of the marks allotted, in accordance with rule 155 A of the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicle Rules, was given as follows Resi BO Work Exper Sector Viable Total dence shop rence Unit.
S. Krishnamurthi Iyer, K. Jayaram and G. S. Prakasrao for the Appellant in CA No.
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION CIVIL NO.
1402/74 .
576 of 1974.
It said The 9th appellant is M s. Kannon Motor Transports P Ltd., Chidambaram.
