The first respondent then filed applications before the Regional Transport Officer for fresh registration certificates in respect of the said vehicles in its name under the provisions of Section 31A 5 of the Act.
The four vehicles were operated by the first respondent as public carriers under permits issued by the Regional Trans port Authority, Bombay under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act.
There was companyrespondence between the Regional Transport Officer and the first respondent which indicated that the third respondent had number paid arrears of passenger tax in respect of the said vehicles.
But the registration certificates bore the endorsement that the third respondent held the vehicles as registered owner under hire purchase agreements with the first respondent.
In companysequence, the first respondent filed a writ petition before the High Court at Bombay.
In 1984 it entered into four hire purchase agreements with the third respondent.
The third respondent companymitted defaults in payment of instalments under the hire purchase agreements.
Thereunder, the third respondent obtained on hire purchase from the first respondent four passenger vehicles.
This is an appeal by the State of Maharashtra against the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the High Court at Bombay.
The vehicles were registered in the name of the third respondent alone under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.
Consequently, the four vehicles were resumed by the first respondent.
The first respondent is a financer and supplies vehicles on hire purchase basis.
The first respondent was called upon to clear the arrears and a penalty had been levied.
The name of the first respondent was number entered on these permits.
