Whether one can made alternattions to his vihicle as per his own wish and will ?- No.
Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Rule 126 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and the effect of Rules 96, 103 and 261 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989.- permissible alteration in a Motor Vehicle -The Division Bench of the High Court in the impugned judgment has opined that alteration is not totally prohibited. More so, in view of Rules 96 and 103 of the Kerala Rules, the Registering Authority is competent to consider roadworthiness and safety of the vehicle and it cannot be rendered a mechanical exercise. It is not only to verify as to whether the measurement conforms to the prototype test etc. The Rules provide for the dimensions of the vehicle. Rule 93 is not an enabling provision to make prototype certification. Rule 47(1)(g) of the Central Rules contemplates on road-worthiness certificate in Form 22 from the manufacturers and in Form 22A from the bodybuilders for applying for registration of the motor vehicles. The body can be built on a chassis in compliance with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules framed thereunder. The manufacturer or the authorities specified under Rule 126 do not provide for any prescription as to the dimensions or nature of the body that is to be built on the chassis. The writ petitions have been allowed and orders passed by the Registering Authorities have been quashed.-
Apex court held that What is permitted has been specifically provided for and what has not been specifically stated would obviously be deemed to have been excluded from these Rules. Let us take a few examples. Rule 104 requires that every motor vehicle, other than threewheelers and motorcycles shall be fitted with two red reflectors, one each on both sides at their
rear. Every motorcycle shall be fitted with at least one red reflector at the rear. Rule 104A provides that two white reflex in the front of the vehicle on each side and visible to oncoming
vehicles from the front at night.
Rule 106 deals with deflections of lights and requires that no lamp showing a light to the front shall be used on any motor vehicle including construction equipment vehicle unless such lamp is so constructed, fitted and maintained that the beam of light emitted therefrom is permanently deflected downwards to such an extent that it is not capable of dazzling any person whose eye position is at a distance of 8 meters from the front of lamp etc.
Rules 119 and 120 specify the kind, size, and manner in which the horn and silencer are to be fixed in a vehicle.
These provisions demonstrate the extent of minuteness in the Rules and the efforts of the framers to ensure, not only the appropriate manner of construction and maintenance of the vehicle but also the safety of other users of the road.
It is the duty of all citizens to comply with the law. The Rules are mandatory and nobody has
the authority in law to mould these rules for the purposes of convenience or luxury and certainly not for crime.
As per Section 32(1) and 32(2) of the Old Act, corresponding to Section 52(1) and 52(2) of the new Act, before making any alteration, the owner was required to give notice to the registering authority and obtain permission. The registering authority was required to communicate its approval or disapproval within seven days and if no such communication was served within the period of seven days, approval of such authority to the proposed alteration was deemed to have been given.
Apex court held that
The vehicle has to comply with the provisions of the Rules contained in Chapter V of the Central Rules as provided in Rule 92(1). Rule 92(1) has to be read as subservient to the provisions contained in section 52 of the Act and what is prohibited therein to allow the same is not the intendment of the rules contained in the Chapter. Various provisions in Chapter V are additional safeguards to what is prohibited in section 52(1) that is to say, what has been specified originally by the manufacturers and once that has been entered in the particulars in the certificate of registration, cannot be varied. No vehicle can be altered so as to change original specification made by manufacturer. Such particulars cannot be altered which have been specified by the manufacturer for the purpose of entry in the certificate of registration. It is provided in Rule 126 of the Central Rules, prototype of every type of vehicle is subject to test. The provisions of Rule 126 intend for fitness of vehicle to be plied on the road by the agencies which are specified therein. Approval and certification of motor vehicles for compliance to these rules shall be in accordance with the AIS: 017-2000. Rule 93 deals with overall dimensions of the motor vehicles such as width, length, height, overhang etc. No doubt about it that the vehicle has to be in conformity with the rules also but Rules cannot be so interpreted so as to permit the alteration as prohibited under section 52(1) of the Act. The alteration under the Rules is permissible except as prohibited by section 52. The specification of the rules would hold good with respect to the matters as not specifically covered under section 52(1) and not specified therein by manufacturer. The emphasis of section 52(1) is not to vary the “original specifications by the manufacturer”. Remaining particulars in a certificate of registration can be modified and changed and can be noted in the certificate of registration as provided in section 52(2), (3) and (5) and the Rules. Under section 52(5), in case a person is holding a vehicle on a hire purchase agreement, he shall not make any alteration except with the written consent of the original owner.
In our considered opinion the Division Bench in the impugned judgment of the High Court of Kerala has failed to give effect to the provisions contained in section 52(1) and has emphasized only on the Rules. As such, the decision rendered by the Division Bench cannot be said to be laying down the law correctly.
The Rules are subservient to the provisions of the Act and particulars in certificate of registration can also be changed except to the extent of the entries made in the same as per the specifications originally made by the manufacturer. Circular No.7/2006 is also to be read in that spirit. Authorities to act accordingly.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra
1
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 219222 OF 2019)
(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) NOs.1322813231 OF 2013)
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER & ORS. ETC. ..APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
K. JAYACHANDRA & ANR. ETC. ..RESPONDENT(S)
With C.A. No. 223 of 2019 [@ SLP [C] No.27499/2013]
J U D G M E N T
ARUN MISHRA, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The question involved is as to the permissible alteration in a Motor
Vehicle in view of the provisions contained in section 52 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), Rule 126 of the Central Motor
Vehicles Rules, 1989 and the effect of Rules 96, 103 and 261 of the Kerala
Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. The Central Government has framed the rules called
Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 (for short “the Central Rules”) in exercise of
the power conferred under section 27 of the Act, and in exercise of powers
conferred under Section 28 of the Act, the Kerala Government has framed the
2
Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Kerala
Rules”). The validity of Circular No.7/2006 issued by the Transport
Commissioner, Kerala to all the Registering Authorities stating that the body of
the vehicle constructed in violation of the prototype test certificate and which
was not built in strict compliance of the specifications given by the
manufacturer are to be denied the registration. Pursuant thereto the Regional
Transport Authorities did not grant permission to certain motor vehicles in view
of the provisions contained in section 52 and the Circular. As such several writ
petitions came to be filed in the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam.
3. In Writ Petition (C) No.29946 of 2006 decided on 16.1.2007 by the
learned Single Judge it was held that Rule 126 of the Central Rules does not
fetter the powers of the Regional Transport Authorities to intelligently exercise
their discretion in terms of the Kerala Rules, in particular Rules 96, 103 and
261; whereas a contrary view was taken by another Single Judge vide order
dated 23.5.2007 in Writ Petition (C) No.8836 of 2007 and it was observed that
the alteration in derogation of prototype test in terms of Rule 126 of the Central
Rules cannot be approved.
4. Writ Petition (C) No.28702 of 2007 for quashing Circular No.7/2006 and
the order passed on 3.7.2007 declining registration was filed.
5. Writ Petition (C) Nos.1323 of 2010 and 1468/2010 were filed with
respect to the denial of registration by the Registering Authorities as the body
3
built over the chassis extended by a length of 15 cms. beyond the chassis which
was not adhering to the specifications given by the manufacturer of the vehicle.
6. Writ Petition (C) No.274 of 2012 was filed by the owner of the vehicle to
question denial of registration in view of the aforesaid rule and the Circular. Yet
another Writ Petition (C) No.274 of 2012 was filed against the refusal to grant
registration of a vehicle which was re-modelled as a ‘recovery vehicle’ altered
in an unauthorised manner by cutting the chassis of the vehicle by one feet at
the rear end which was not in conformity with the prototype test in terms of
Rule 126 of the Central Rules.
7. In view of the conflict in judgments in Writ Petition (C) No.29946 of
2006 and Writ Petition (C) No.8836 of 2007 regarding the issue of alteration
whether alteration is permissible at variance with the manufacturer’s
specification contained in the prototype test certification, the matter was
referred to a Division Bench of the High Court. The High Court by the common
judgment passed in the writ petitions came to the conclusion that structural
alteration is permissible as per the provisions of the Kerala Rules. The view
taken by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (C) No.29946 of 2006 has
been upheld hence the appeals have been preferred in this Court. This Court has
stayed the operation of the impugned judgment and order on 16.4.2013.
Considering the importance of the matter notice was issued to the Ministry of
4
Road Transport and Highways through its Secretary, and Mr. K.V. Viswanathan,
learned senior counsel was appointed as amicus curiae to assist the Court.
8. It is apparent from the factual matrix of Writ Petition (C) No.28702 of
2007 that it was a case of medium commercial bus chassis. The registration was
declined on the ground that the platform of the bus was extended to a distance
of 37 cms. and the body was having an extension of 39 cms. from the extreme
rear end of the chassis. The vehicle had an extended length of 39 cms. The
technical specifications of model TATA bus chassis have specified length of
757.5 cm. After the body was built, it had a total length of 796.5 cm.
9. Similarly, in Writ Petition (C) No.1323 of 2010 and Writ Petition (C)
No.1468 of 2010, the body was built over the chassis extended by 15 cm.
beyond the chassis. In Writ Petition (C) No.274 of 2012 the vehicle was remodeled as a recovery vehicle by cutting the chassis of the vehicle by one foot
at the rear end. In Writ Petition (C) No.29946 of 2006, the unladen weight of the
vehicle before alteration was 2315 kg. and the same had been increased on
alteration to 2715 kgs. Besides, there were changes in the measurement of the
body which resulted in declining the permission for registration. In Writ Petition
(C) No.8836 of 2007, the length of the chassis of the vehicle as per prototype
was 832.5 cm. but after building the body it was found to have been extended to
885 cm.
5
10. Section 52 of the Act deals with alteration in the motor vehicle. Prior to
that, provision with respect to alteration in motor vehicles was contained in
section 32 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. Section 32 of the Act of 1939 is
extracted hereunder:
“SECTION 32: ALTERATION IN MOTOR VEHICLE
(1) No owner of a motor vehicle shall so alter the vehicle that the
particulars contained in the certificate of registration are no
longer accurate, unless
(a) he has given notice to the registering authority within whose
jurisdiction he resides of the alteration he proposes to make,
and
(b) he has obtained the approval of the registering authority to
make such alteration:
Provided that it shall not be necessary to obtain such approval
for making any change in the unladen weight of the motor
vehicle consequent on the addition or removal of fittings or
accessories if Such change does not exceed two percent. of the
weight entered in the certificate of registration.
(2) Where a registering authority has received notice under subsection (1), it shall, within seven days of the receipt thereof,
communicate, by post, to the owner of the vehicle its approval to
the proposed alteration or otherwise:
Provided that where the owner of the motor vehicle has not
received any such communication within the said period of
seven days, the approval of such authority to the proposed
alteration shall be deemed to have been given.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), a
State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,
authorise, subject to such conditions as may be specified in the
notification, the owners of not less than ten transport vehicles to
alter any vehicle owned by them so as to change its engine
number by replacing the engine thereof without the approval of
the registering authority.
(4) Where any alteration has been made in a motor vehicle either
with the approval of the registering authority given or deemed to
have been given under subsection (2) or by reason of any
change in its engine number without such approval under sub
6
section (3), the owner of the vehicle shall within fourteen days of
the making of the alteration, report the alteration to the
registering authority within whose jurisdiction he resides and
shall forward the certificate of registration to that authority
together with the prescribed fee in order that particulars of the
alteration may be entered therein.
(5) A registering authority other than the original registering
authority making any such entry shall communicate the details
of the entry to the original registering authority.”
(emphasis supplied)
11. The alteration in a motor vehicle under the parent Act is dealt with in
section 52 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Section 52 as originally enacted is
extracted hereunder:
"52. Alternation in a motor vehicle .
(1) No owner of a motor vehicle shall so alter the vehicle that
the particulars contained in the certificate of registration are
no longer accurate, unless.
(a) he has given notice to the registering authority within
whose jurisdiction he has the residence or the place of
business where the vehicle is normally kept, as the case may
be of the alteration he proposes to make; and
(b) he has obtained the approval of that registering authority
to make such alteration:
Provided that it shall not be necessary to obtain such
approval for making any change in the unladen weight of the
motor vehicle consequent on the addition or removal of
fittings or accessories if such change does not exceed two
percent of the weight entered in the certificate of registration.
Provided further that modification of the engine, or any
part thereof, of a vehicle for facilitating its operation by a
different type of fuel or source of energy including battery,
compressed natural gas, solar power or any other fuel or
source of energy other than liquid petroleum gas shall be
treated as an alteration but that shall be subject to such
conditions as may be prescribed.
(2) Where a registering authority has received notice under
subsection (1), it shall, within seven days of the receipt
thereof, communicate, by post, to the owner of the vehicle its
approval to the proposed alteration or otherwise:
7
Provided that where the owner of the motor vehicle has not
received any such communication within the said period of
seven days, the approval of such authority to the proposed
alteration shall be deemed to have been given.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), a
State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,
authorise, subject to such conditions as may be specified in
the notification, the owners of not less than ten transport
vehicles to alter any vehicle owned by them so as to change
its engine number by replacing the engine thereof without the
approval of the registering authority.
(4) Where any alteration has been made in a motor vehicle
either with the approval of the registering authority given or
deemed to have been given under subsection (2) or by reason
of any change in its engine number without such approval
under subsection (3), the owner of the vehicle shall within
fourteen days of the making of the alteration, report the
alteration to the registering authority within whose
jurisdiction he resides and shall forward the certificate of
registration to that authority together with the prescribed fee
in order that particulars of the alteration may be entered
therein.
(5) A registering authority other than the original registering
authority making any such entry shall communicate the
details of the entry to the original registering authority.
(6) No person holding a vehicle under a hirepurchase
agreement shall make any alteration to the vehicle for which
approval of the registering authority is required under subsection (1) except with the written consent of the registered
owner.”
(emphasis supplied)
12. Section 52 has undergone change by way of Amendment Act 27/2000.
The Statement of Objects and Reasons of Amendment Act 27/2000 is extracted
hereunder:
“Amendment Act 27 of 2000 – Statement of Objects and
Reasons. – The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 consolidated and
rationalized various laws regulating road transport. The said Act
was amended in 1994.
2. Further amendments in the aforesaid Act have become
necessary so as to reduce the vehicular pollution and to ensure
the safety of the road users. It is, therefore, proposed to prohibit
alteration of vehicles in any manner including change of tyres of
higher capacity. However, the alteration of vehicles with a view
to facilitating the use of ecofriendly fuel including Liquefied
8
Petroleum Gas (LPG) is being permitted. Further, it is proposed
to confer powers on the Central Government to allow the
alteration of vehicles for certain specified purposes.
3. At present, the educational institutions are not required to
obtain permits for the operation of buses owned by them. It is
proposed to bring the buses run by these institutions within the
purview of the aforesaid Act by requiring them to obtain permits.
4. It is also proposed to allow renewal of permits, driving
licences and registration certificates granted under the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1939 to be renewed under the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988, by inserting new section 217 – A.
5. The proposed amendments are essential in the overall interest
of securing road safety and maintaining a clean environment.”
(emphasis supplied)
13. It is apparent that section 52 has been amended with the purpose to
prohibit alteration of vehicles in any manner including change of tyres of higher
capacity, keeping in view road safety and protection of environment. Section 52
has been amended by virtue of Amendment Act 27/2000 in the following
manner:
“52. Alteration in a motor vehicle. –
(1) No owner of a motor vehicle shall so alter the vehicle that the
particulars contained in the certificate of registration are at
variance with those originally specified by the manufacturer:
Provided that where the owner of a motor vehicle makes
modification of the engine, or any part thereof of a vehicle for
facilitating its operation by different type of fuel or source of
energy including battery, compressed natural gas, solar power,
liquid petroleum gas or any other fuel or source of energy, by
fitment of a conversion kit, such modification shall be carried
out subject to such conditions as may be prescribed:
Provided further that the Central Government may prescribe
specifications conditions for approval, retrofitment and other
related matters for such conversion kits;
Provided also that the Central Government may grant an
exemption for alteration of vehicles in a manner other than
specified above, for any specific purpose.
9
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), a
State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,
authorise, subject to such conditions as may be specified in the
notifications, and permit any person owning not less than ten
transport vehicles to alter any vehicle owned by him so as to
replace the engine thereof with engine of the same make and
type, without the approval of registering authority.
(3) Where any alteration has been made in a motor vehicle
without the approval of registering authority or by reason of
replacement of its engine without such approval under subsection
(2), the owner of the vehicle shall, within fourteen days of the
making of the alteration, report the alteration to the registering
authority within whose jurisdiction he resides and shall forward
the certificate of registration to that authority together with the
prescribed fee in order that particulars of registration may be
entered therein.
(4) A registering authority other than the original registering
authority making any such entry shall communicate the details
of the entry to the original registering authority.
(5) Subject to the provisions made under subsection (1), (2), (3)
and (4), no person holding a vehicle under a hirepurchase
agreement shall make any alteration to the vehicle except with
the written consent of the registered owner.
Explanation. For the purpose of this section, “alteration”
means a change in the structure of a vehicle which results in
change in its basic feature.”
(emphasis supplied)
14. Rule 126 of the Central Rules deals with the prototype of every motor
vehicle to be subject to test. Rule 126 is extracted hereunder:
“126. Prototype of every motor vehicle to be subject to
test. On and from the date of commencement of Central Motor
Vehicles (Amendment) Rules, 1993, every [manufacturer or
importer] of motor vehicles [including trailers, semi trailers and
modular hydraulic trailer] [including registered association
(identified by the concerned State Transport Department) for Erickshaw wherever applicable] shall submit the prototype of the
vehicle [to be manufactured or imported by him] for test by the
Vehicle Research and Development Establishment of the
Ministry of Defence of the Government of India or Automotive
Research Association of India, Pune, [or the Central Farm
Machinery Testing and Training Institute, Budni (MP)], or the
Indian Institute of Petroleum, Dehradun, [or the Central
Institute of Road Transport", Pune, or the International Centre
10
for Automotive Technology, Manesar,] [or the Northern Region
Farm Machinery Training and Testing Institute, Hissar (for
testing of combine harvester) and such other agencies as may be
specified by the Central Government for granting a certificate by
that agency as to the compliance of provisions of the Act and
these rules:]
[Provided that the procedure for type approval and
certification of motor vehicles for compliance to these rules shall
be in accordance with the AIS:0172000, as amended from time
to time:]
[Provided further that in respect to the vehicles imported into
India as completely built units (CBU), the importer shall submit
a vehicle of that particular model and type to the testing
agencies for granting a certificate by that agency as to the
compliance to the provision of the Act and these rules.]
[126A. The testing agencies referred to in rule 126 shall in
accordance with the procedures laid down by the Central
Government also conduct tests on vehicles drawn from the
production line of the manufacturer to verify whether these
vehicles conform to the provisions of [rules made under section
110 of the Act]:]
[Provided that in case the number of vehicles sold in India for
a given base model and its variants (manufactured in India or
imported to India) are less than 250 in any consecutive period of
six months in a year, then such base model and its variants
need not be subjected to the above test, if at least one model or
its variants manufactured or imported by that manufacturer or
importer, as the case may be, is subjected to such tests at least
once in a year:
Provided further that, in case the number of base models and
its variants manufactured/imported is more than one and if the
individual base model and its variants are less than 250 in any
consecutive period of six months in a year, then the testing
agencies can pick up one of the vehicles out of such models and
their variants once in a year for carrying out such test.] ”
15. Rule 93 deals with the overall dimension of motor vehicles. The Rule
prescribes the overall width, overall length, and overall height etc. Rule 93(1)
deals with overall width. Rule 93(2) with overall length. Rule 93(4) with overall
height. Rule 93(6) with overhang etc.
11
16. The relevant Rules 96, 103 and 261 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules,
1989, providing for inspection of vehicles, recording alteration and body
construction are extracted hereunder:
“96. Inspection of vehicle prior to Registration: (1) Inspecting
Officer. The Registering Authority or such authority as the
Government may by order appoint shall inspect the vehicle as
required by section 44 of the Act.
(2) Production of vehicle for inspection: The vehicle shall be
produced for inspection along with the required documents for
registration, before the inspecting officer, for comparative
scrutiny of the particulars contained in the application with the
physical features of the vehicles, and for ascertaining its fitness
for use in public place.
(3) Report of Inspecting Officer: The Inspecting Officer after
making modifications deemed necessary in the particulars
contained in the application, shall certify therein regarding the
correctness of the entries and the fitness of the vehicle:
Provided that in the case of a transport vehicle, or for any
other vehicle of which the body is not factorybuilt or a
stereotyped pattern previously approved by the Registering
Authority, he shall prepare and issue a measurement certificate
in Form "MC" and a sketch showing therein the seating
arrangements, dimensions and other relevant particulars under
Chapter VII of these rules. The Inspecting Officer shall
simultaneously forward a copy each of the measurement
certificate and sketch to the concerned Registering Authority
also.
103. Recording alteration to a motor vehicle: (1) Ascertaining
suitability of alteration – The Registering Authority may require
inspection of the vehicle by himself or by any other Inspector of
motor vehicles to satisfy that any alteration made is suitable.
The owner of the vehicle shall, on demand, produce the vehicle
for inspection.
(2) The Inspecting Officer shall prepare and issue a fresh
measurement certificate in Form “MC” and a sketch showing
therein the seating arrangement, dimensions etc., as found on
inspection in the following circumstances:
12
(a) When consequent to any structural alteration made in a
motor vehicle the particulars of registration noted in one or more
of items 1, 3, 11, 13 & 19 of the certificate of registration are no
longer accurate.
(b) When consequent to any rearrangement of loading space or
seats, their position or dimensions are altered though such
arrangement does not affect the registration particulars referred
to in clause (a) above.
261. Body construction: The body of every transport
vehicle shall be soundly constructed and securely fastened to
the frame of the vehicle and in accordance with the
specifications, if any, laid down by the State or Regional
Transport Authority.”
(emphasis supplied)
17. The Division Bench of the High Court in the impugned judgment has
opined that alteration is not totally prohibited. More so, in view of Rules 96 and
103 of the Kerala Rules, the Registering Authority is competent to consider
roadworthiness and safety of the vehicle and it cannot be rendered a mechanical
exercise. It is not only to verify as to whether the measurement conforms to the
prototype test etc. The Rules provide for the dimensions of the vehicle. Rule 93
is not an enabling provision to make prototype certification. Rule 47(1)(g) of
the Central Rules contemplates on road-worthiness certificate in Form 22 from
the manufacturers and in Form 22A from the bodybuilders for applying for
registration of the motor vehicles. The body can be built on a chassis in
compliance with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules framed
thereunder. The manufacturer or the authorities specified under Rule 126 do not
provide for any prescription as to the dimensions or nature of the body that is to
13
be built on the chassis. The writ petitions have been allowed and orders passed
by the Registering Authorities have been quashed.
18. It was urged by Mr. K.V. Viswanathan, learned senior counsel appearing
as amicus curiae that the provisions contained in section 52 of the Act and Rule
126, as well as the Kerala Rules, have not been correctly interpreted by the High
Court. It is not permissible to make alteration under the Rules in contravention
of the provisions contained in section 52 of the Act. The provisions of the Act
and the Rules have been enacted for the purpose of safety on the roads and
environment and it is not permissible to alter the vehicle in derogation to the
provisions of the Act. He has referred to a plethora of decisions and has also
attracted the attention of this Court towards the pending Motor Vehicles
Amendment) Bill, 2017 and the extracts of 243rd Report of the Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism and Culture on the Motor Vehicles
(Amendment) Bill, 2016.
19. Mr. Aman Lekhi, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on
behalf of the Ministry of Transport contended that the correct interpretation of
the amended provisions in section 52 has not been made by the High Court. He
has also attracted our attention to the Rules.
20. In Avishek Goenka (1) v. Union of India & Anr. (2012) 5 SCC 321, a
question came up for consideration with respect to Rule 100 of the Central
Rules prescribing a standard for safety. This Court held the same to be a valid
14
piece of legislation. The object of the Act also came up for consideration and the
Court observed that the legislative intent attaching due significance to the
“public safety” is evident from the Objects and Reasons of the Act. The Court
should give an interpretation of the Rules which would serve the legislative
intent and the object of framing such Rules, in preference to the one which
would defeat the very purpose of enacting the Rules as well as undermining the
public safety and interest. This Court considered the provisions contained in
section 52, Rules 92 and 100 of the Central Rules and observed thus:
“18. From the above provisions, it is clear that the Rules deal
with every minute detail of construction and maintenance of a
vehicle. In other words, the standards, sizes, and specifications
which the manufacturer of a vehicle is required to adhere to
while manufacturing the vehicle are exhaustively dealt with
under the Rules. What is permitted has been specifically
provided for and what has not been specifically stated would
obviously be deemed to have been excluded from these Rules. It
would neither be permissible nor possible for the Court to read
into these statutory provisions, what is not specifically provided
for. These are the specifications which are in consonance with
the prescribed IS No. 2553Part 2 of 1992 and nothing is
ambiguous or uncertain.
19. Let us take a few examples. Rule 104 requires that every
motor vehicle, other than threewheelers and motorcycles shall
be fitted with two red reflectors, one each on both sides at their
rear. Every motorcycle shall be fitted with at least one red
reflector at the rear. Rule 104A provides that two white reflex in
the front of the vehicle on each side and visible to oncoming
vehicles from the front at night.
20. Rule 106 deals with deflections of lights and requires that
no lamp showing a light to the front shall be used on any motor
vehicle including construction equipment vehicle unless such
lamp is so constructed, fitted and maintained that the beam of
light emitted therefrom is permanently deflected downwards to
such an extent that it is not capable of dazzling any person
whose eye position is at a distance of 8 meters from the front of
15
lamp etc. Rules 119 and 120 specify the kind, size, and manner
in which the horn and silencer are to be fixed in a vehicle.
21. These provisions demonstrate the extent of minuteness in
the Rules and the efforts of the framers to ensure, not only the
appropriate manner of construction and maintenance of the
vehicle but also the safety of other users of the road.
28. The legislative intent attaching due significance to the 'public
safety' is evident from the object and reasons of the Act, the
provisions of the Act and more particularly, the Rules framed
thereunder. Even if we assume, for the sake of argument, that
Rule 100 is capable of any interpretation, then this Court should
give it an interpretation which would serve the legislative intent
and the object of framing such rules, in preference to one which
would frustrate the very purpose of enacting the Rules as well as
undermining the public safety and interest.
32. In the present case as well, even if some individual interests
are likely to suffer, such individual or private interests must give
in to the larger public interest. It is the duty of all citizens to
comply with the law. The Rules are mandatory and nobody has
the authority in law to mould these rules for the purposes of
convenience or luxury and certainly not for crime.”
21. It has been observed that the Rules deal in minute details with the
construction and maintenance of the vehicle. Rules also deal with the safety of
other users on the road. If some individual interest is likely to suffer, such
individual interest must give way to the larger public interest.
22. Before dilating further upon the issue we take note of the decision in R.
Ramasamy v. The Secretary, Ministry of Transport, Chennai & Ors. (2009) 1
Mad.LJ 1027 wherein the Madras High Court has considered the provisions of
section 52(1)(a) as amended by Act 27/2000 and has opined thus:
“8.4 A comparison of the aforesaid provisions makes it clear that
Section 32(1)(a) and (b) of the Old Act along with the proviso had
been practically reenacted as Section 52(1)(a) and (b) of the New
Act. However, in the New Act, a second proviso was added which
16
permitted modification of the engine for facilitating its operation
by a different type of fuel. Section 32(2) of the Old Act along with
the proviso was reenacted as Section 52(2) of the New Act. As
per Section 32(1) and 32(2) of the Old Act, corresponding to
Section 52(1) and 52(2) of the new Act, before making any
alteration, the owner was required to give notice to the
registering authority and obtain permission. The registering
authority was required to communicate its approval or
disapproval within seven days and if no such communication
was served within the period of seven days, approval of such
authority to the proposed alteration was deemed to have been
given. Section 32(3) of the Old Act corresponding to Section 52(3)
of the New Act, contained an enabling provision whereunder the
State Government could authorize the owners having ten or
more transport vehicles to change its engine number by
replacing such engine without the approval of the registering
authority. Section 32(4) of the Old Act corresponding to Section
52(4) of the New Act, cast a duty on the owner of the vehicle to
report the alteration made with actual or deemed approval as
contemplated under Section 32(2) of the Old Act corresponding
to Section 52(2) of the new Act or, and without approval as
contemplated under Section 32(3) of the Old Act corresponding
to Section 52(3) of the New Act "in order that particulars of the
alteration may be entered in the certificate of registration".
Section 32(5) of the Old Act corresponding to Section 52(5) of the
New Act envisaged that the registering authority making any
such entry should communicate the details of the entry to the
original registering authority. Section 52(6) of the New Act
contained a new provision laying down that a person holding a
vehicle under a hire purchase agreement cannot make the
alterations contemplated in Section 52(1) of the New Act without
the written consent of the registered owner.
8.5 After amendment of Section 52 of the New Act under Act 27
of 2000, Section 52(1) has been retained as Section 52(1) with
significant modification. It is important to notice that the
provisions contained in Section 32(1)(a) & (b) of the Old Act
corresponding to Section 52(1)(a) & (b) of the New Act relating to
giving of notice and obtaining of approval of the registering
authority have been deleted in the Amended Act. The amended
section does not contain any provision relating to giving of notice
or obtaining of approval. The first proviso to Section 52(1) of the
New Act has also been deleted and the second proviso to Section
52(1) of the New Act relating to the modification of engine has
been reenacted as the first proviso to Section 52(1) of the
Amended Act. Moreover, two other provisos have been added to
Section 52(1). Since the earlier provision in Section 52(1)(a) & (b)
17
of the New Act relating to the issuance of notice and approval
have been deleted. Section 52(2) of the New Act which related to
deemed approval on expiry of seven days has also been deleted
and Section 52(3) of the New Act has been renumbered as
Section 52(2) of the Amended Act. Section 52(4) of the New Act
has been reenacted with certain changes as Section 52(3) of the
Amended Act requiring the owner to report regarding the
alteration to the registering authority. Under Section 52(4) of the
New Act, the owner was required to report about the alteration,
made either with the approval or deemed approval of the
registering authority, or by reason of replacement of engine,
without such approval, to the registering authority within whose
jurisdiction he resided and shall forward the certificate of
registration to that authority together with the prescribed fee "in
order that particulars of the alteration may be entered therein".
8.6 A minute examination of the provisions makes it clear that
the expression "particulars of the alteration may be entered
therein" as contained in Section 52(4) of the New Act, now reads
as "in order that particulars of the registration may be entered
therein" in the Amended Act. It is crystal clear that the word
"registration" in the Amended Act is an obvious typographical
mistake, which has been inadvertently incorporated instead of
the word "alteration". What is intended is that the particulars of
the alteration made in a vehicle should be incorporated in the
certificate of registration.
8.7 Sections 52(5) and 52(6) of the New Act, have been now reenacted as Sections 52(4) and 52(5) of the Amended Act
respectively. The Amended Act, however, contains an important
explanation, which was absent in the Old Act or the New Act.
The explanation is to the effect that, for the purpose of Section
52, "alteration" means a change in the structure of a vehicle
which results in a change in its basic feature.
9. Section 52(1) of the Amended Act obviously is not very happily
worded. By altering the vehicle the particulars contained in the
certificate of registration cannot be a variance with those
specified by the manufacturers. The certificate of registration
contains some of the vital particulars of the vehicles. The real
meaning is that the particulars of alteration to be incorporated
in the Certificate of Registration as contemplated in Section
52(3) of the Amended Act are at variance with those originally
specified by the manufacturer. When the provision is read in the
light of the explanation, it is obvious that changes or
modification which do not result in a change in basic feature
18
need not be considered as an alteration within the meaning of
Section 52 of the Amended Act.
……
11.1 A comparison of the relevant provisions contained in the
Old Act and the New Act with the provisions of the Amendment
Act clearly indicates that the Legislature has dispensed with the
requirement of obtaining permission relating to every change or
modification effected in a motor vehicle. In fact, the 1988 Act
itself has been amended in such a manner as to make it
unnecessary for seeking permission to make such minor change
or modification. Moreover, every minor change or modification is
not necessarily considered as an alteration within the meaning
of Section 52 of the Amended Act. In the present case, the RTO
has practically applied the provisions, which were available
before the amendment was effected in 2000, without taking note
of such amendment.”
23 It has been observed by the High Court of Madras that an alternation in
the vehicle is not permissible which may be at variance with the particulars
contained in the certificate of registration which contains vital particulars of the
vehicle and the permissible changes or modifications and which do not result in
change in the basic feature, need not be considered as alternation within the
meaning of section 52 of the Amended Act.
24. The decision in the case of K.S. Rajesh Kumar v. The Additional
Registering Authority of Kerala High Court delivered on 1.2.2010 has also been
referred to wherein the question of alteration in the vehicle came up for
consideration. The passenger vehicle was purchased as defined in section 2(17)
of the M.V. Act. The petitioner wanted to convert the same into the vehicle that
could be used as a cinema outdoor unit by fixing a generator set therein. The
Court held that the petitioner has not made any alteration to either the chassis or
19
the body of the vehicle as the manufacturer has manufactured only the chassis
of the vehicle and not its superstructure. In place of the seats meant for
passengers, the petitioner was fitting only a generator which alteration was
permissible. There was no violation of the provisions of section 52.
25. The decision in Mohd. Javeed v. Union of India & Ors. (2001) 9 ALD 88
= 2009 1 ALT 507 has also been referred by the learned amicus curiae. In the
said case chassis were changed. The Court held that the chassis is the base
frame of a motor vehicle and no doubt is an important feature of the vehicle.
Whether the change of the chassis would amount to change in the structure of
the vehicle. The replacement became necessary on account of the accident.
There was no other change in the structure of the vehicle. It was held that
section 52(3) enables the owner of the vehicle to replace the engine of the
vehicle but the factum of replacement has to be reported to the Authority within
14 days. On the same analogy, the Court held that the chassis was changed by
the manufacturer with the approval of the insurance company and the bank and
change became necessary due to the damage caused to the chassis owing to the
accident. Thus the refusal of registration was held to be bad in law and set aside.
In fact, there was no change of chassis except the replacement in the said case.
26. The decision in V.N. Dharmakrishnan v. Deputy Commissioner of
Transport, AIR 2006 Mad. 340 has also been placed for consideration. The
question arose whether a Delivery Van Goods Carrier can be altered as an
20
ambulance. The Court held it to be a clear violation of the provisions of the
M.V. Act and using goods carriage as an ambulance for which permit had
already been canceled, cannot be condoned on the ground that the 5th respondent
was rendering some free service. The decision turned on its own facts.
27. The very object of the amendment of section 52(1) by Act 27/2000 is to
prohibit alteration of a vehicle as provided including the change of tyres of
higher capacity. The amended section 52(1) has specified the extent to which
vehicle cannot be altered. A reading of the provisions makes it clear that no
vehicle can be altered in a manner where particulars in the certificate of
registration are at variance with those “originally specified by the
manufacturer”. The proviso to sub-section (1) permits modification of the
engine, or any part thereof, of a vehicle for facilitating its operation by a
different type of fuel or source of energy including battery etc., such
modification is permissible to be carried out subject to such conditions as may
be prescribed. The second proviso to section 52(1) empowers the Central
Government to prescribe specifications, conditions for approval, retro-fitment
and other related matters for such conversion kits. The Central Government has
power to grant an exemption for alteration of vehicles for any specific purpose.
Section 52(2) authorizes a State Government to issue a notification and permit
any person owning not less than 10 transport vehicles to alter any vehicle
owned by him so as to replace the ‘engine’ with an engine of the same make and
21
type, without the approval of the Registering Authority. Section 52(3) provides
that where the alteration has been made without the approval of the Registering
Authority, obviously the one which is permissible in the motor vehicle, the
owner of the vehicle has to report the same within 14 days to make an entry in
the particulars of the registration. The provisions of section 52(2), (3), (4) and
(5) have to be read harmoniously. The Explanation to section 52 says that
“alteration” means a change in the structure of a vehicle which results in a
change in its basic feature. The alterations which do not change the basic
features are outside the purview of alteration.
28. The object and the clear intent of amended section 52 is that the vehicle
cannot be so altered that the particulars contained in the certificate of
registration are at variance with those “originally specified by the
manufacturer”. The manufacturer issues sale certificate in Form 21 which has
been framed under Rule 47(1)(a) of the Central Rules. Rule 47(1)(a) is extracted
hereunder :
“47. Application for registration of motor vehicles. (1) An
application for registration of a motor vehicle shall be made in
Form 20 to the registering authority within a period of 1[seven
days] from the date of taking delivery of such vehicle,
excluding the period of journey and shall be accompanied by
(a) sale certificate in Form 21;”
29. The particulars are to be specified by the manufacturer. An application for
registration of the motor vehicle has to be filed in Form 20. It has to accompany
22
a sale certificate issued by the manufacturer or dealer etc. as the case may be as
provided in Rule 47(1)(a) and (d). Form 20 is extracted hereunder:
“APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF A MOTOR VEHICLE
(To be made in duplicate if the vehicle is held under an agreement of HirePurchase/Lease/Hypothecation and a duplicate copy with the endorsement of the Registering
Authority to be returned to the Financier simultaneously on Registration of motor vehicle)
To
The Registering Authority,
.................................
1. Full name of person to be registered as Registered
Owner son/Wife/daughter of ............................
2. Age of person to be registered as Registered owner ...........................
3. Permanent address
(Electoral Roll/Life Insurance Policy/Passport/ Pay slip issued by any office of the Central
Government/State Government or a local body/ Any other document on documents as may be
prescribed by the State Government/Affidavit sworn before an Executive Magistrate or a First
Class Judicial Magistrate or a Notary Public to be enclosed)
............................
4. Temporary address/ Official address, if any ............................
5. Duration of stay at the present address ............................
6. PAN number (optional) ............................
7. Place of birth ............................
8. If place of birth is outside India, when migrated to India ...........................
9. (Omitted) . ..........................
10. Name and address of the Dealer or Manufacturer
from whom the vehicle was purchased (sale certificate
and certificate of roadworthiness issued by the
manufacturer to be enclosed) …………………
11. If ex-army vehicle or imported vehicle, enclose proof.
If Locally manufactured Trailer/Semi-trailer, enclose the
Approval of design by the State Transport Authority and
note the proceedings number and date of approval ............................
12. Class of vehicle (if motorcycle, whether with or without gear ............................
23
13. The motor vehicle is ............................
(a) a new vehicle, ..............
(b) ex-army vehicle, ..............
(c) imported vehicle ..............
(d) in-use E-rickshaw or E-cart ………………
14. Type of body ............................
15. Type of vehicle ............................
16. Maker's name ............................
17. Month and year of manufacture ............................
18. Number of cylinders ............................
19. Horse power ............................
20. Cubic capacity ............................
21. Maker's classification or if not known, wheel base ............................
22. Chassis No. (Affix Pencil print) ............................
23. Engine Number or Motor Number in case of
Battery Operated Vehicles
............................
24. Seating capacity (including driver) ............................
25. Fuel used in the engine ...........................
26. Unladen weight ............................
27. Particulars of previous registration and registered number (if any) ............................
28. Colour or colours of body wings and front end ............................
I hereby declare that the motor vehicle has not been registered in any State in India.
ADDITIONAL PARTICULARS TO BE COMPLETED ONLY IN THE CASE OF
TRANSPORT VEHICLES OTHER THAN MOTOR CAB
29. Number, description, size and ply rating of tyres, as declared by the manufacturer
(a) Front axle = ...............................
(b) Rear axle = ................................
(c) Any other axle = .........................
24
(d) Tandem axle = ............................
30. Gross vehicle weight
(a) as certified by manufacturer ......... Kgms
(b) To be registered ......................... Kgms
31. Maximum axle weight
(a) Front axle= .................................Kgms
(b) Rear axle= .................................Kgms
(c) Any other axle=..........................Kgms
(d) Tandem axle= ...........................Kgms
32. (a) Overall length............................
(b) Overall width...............................
(c) Overall height .............................
(d) Over hang .................................
The above particulars are to be filled in for a rigid frame motor vehicle of two or more axles
for an articulated vehicle of three or more axles or, to the extent applicable, for trailer, where a
second semi-trailer or additional semitrailer are to be registered with an articulated motor
vehicle. The following particulars are to be furnished for each such semi-trailer.
33. Type of body ………………………
34. Unladen weight ……………………...
35. Number, description and size of tyres on each axle ……………………..
36. Maximum axle weight in respect of each axle ……………………..
37. The vehicle is covered by a valid certificate of Insurance under Chapter XI of the Act
Insurance Certificate Or Cover Note
No .............................
Date ........................... of ..............................
(Name of company) Valid from .......... to .......
38. The vehicle is exempted from insurance
The relevant order is enclosed ………………………….
25
39. I have paid the prescribed fee of Rs. .……………………….
Date.............. ……………………………….
Signature or thumb impression of the
person to be registered as registered owner
Note.- The motor vehicle above described is--
(i) Subject to Hire-purchase agreement/lease agreement with ...................................................
(ii) Subject to hypothecation in favour of ............................................................................
(iii) Not held under Hire-purchase agreement, or lease agreement or subject to Hypothecation
Strike out whatever is inapplicable, if the vehicle is subject to any such agreement the signature
of the Financier with whom such agreement has been entered into is to be obtained.
........................................................ ………………………………………
Signature of the financier with whom an Signature or thumb impression of the registered
Agreement of Hire-purchase, Lease owner
or Hypothecation has been entered into.
CERTIFICATE OF INSPECTION OF MOTOR VEHICLE
Certified that the particulars contained in the application are true and that the vehicle
complies with the requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules made
thereunder.
Date .............................
Ref. No..............................
…………………………
Signature of the Inspecting Authority
Name.....................................
Designation ..............................
OFFICE ENDORSEMENT
Office of the..............................
The above-said motor vehicle has been assigned the Registration number.................... and
registered in the name of the applicant and the vehicle is subject to an agreement of Hirepurchase/Lease/Hypothecation with the Financier referred above.
Date......................... ……………………………..
Signature of the Registering Authority
To
26
The Financier ......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................
(To be sent by registered post acknowledgment due)
Specimen signature or thumb-impression of the person to be registered as Registered Owner
and Financier are to be obtained in original application for affixing and attestation by the
Registering Authority with office seal in Forms 23 and 24 in such a manner that the part of
impression of seal or a stamp and attestation shall fall upon each signature.
Specimen signature of the Financier Specimen Signature of Registered Owner
1) …………………………. 1) ……………………………...
2) ………………………… 2)……………………………….”
30. Form 21 as provided in Rule 47(a) and (d) contain sale certificate issued
by the manufacturer same is extracted hereunder:
“Form 21
SALE CERTIFICATE
(To be issued by manufacturer or dealer or registered E-rickshaw or E-cart Association (in case
of E-rickshaw or E-cart) or officer of Defence Department (in case of military auctioned
vehicles) for presentation along with the application for registration of a motor vehicle).
Certified that........................................................................................................
(brand name of the vehicle) has been delivered by us to.......................................
on................................ (date)
Name of the buyer .....................................................
Son/wife/daughter of .....................................................
Address (Permanent) .....................................................
(Temporary) .....................................................
The vehicle is held under agreement of hire-purchase/lease/hypothecation
with......................................................
The details of the vehicle are given below :
1. Class of vehicle ...................................................
27
2. Maker's name...................................................
3. Chassis No....................................................
4. [Engine number or motor number in the case of Battery Operated
Vehicles] ...................................................
5. Horsepower or cubic capacity...................................................
6. Fuel used ...................................................
7. Number of cylinders ...................................................
8. Month and year of manufacture ...................................................
9. Seating capacity (including driver) ...................................................
10. Unladen weight ……………………..
11. Maximum axle weight and number and description of tyres (in case of transport vehicle)
(a) Front axle……………….
(b) Rear axle ……………….
(c) Any other axle ………….
(d) Tandem axle ……………
12. Colour or colours of the body ………………………..
13. Gross vehicle weight ……………………………
14. Type of body ……………………………………
[Signature of the manufacturer or dealer or Officer
of Defence Department or registered E-rickshaw or
E-cart Association]
*Strike out whichever is inapplicable.”
31. The certificate of registration has to be issued in Form 23 as provided in
Rule 48 of the Central Rules. Rule 48 deals with the issue of the certificate of
registration under Rule 47. Rule 48 is extracted hereunder :
“48. Issue of certificate of registration.-- On receipt of an application
under rule 47 and after verification of the documents furnished
therewith, the registering authority shall, subject to the provisions of
section 44, issue to the owner of the motor vehicle a certificate of
28
registration in Form 23 or Form 23A, as may be specified in the
Notification issued by the concerned State Government or Union
Territory Administration [within the period of thirty days from the
receipt of such an application]:
[Provided that where the certificate of registration pertains to a
transport vehicle it shall be handed over to the registered owner only
after recording the certificate of fitness in Form 38 [within the period
of thirty days from the date of receipt of such an application].]”
32. The vehicle has to comply with the provisions of the Rules contained in
Chapter V of the Central Rules as provided in Rule 92(1). Rule 92(1) has to be
read as subservient to the provisions contained in section 52 of the Act and what
is prohibited therein to allow the same is not the intendment of the rules
contained in the Chapter. Various provisions in Chapter V are additional
safeguards to what is prohibited in section 52(1) that is to say, what has been
specified originally by the manufacturers and once that has been entered in the
particulars in the certificate of registration, cannot be varied. No vehicle can be
altered so as to change original specification made by manufacturer. Such
particulars cannot be altered which have been specified by the manufacturer for
the purpose of entry in the certificate of registration. It is provided in Rule 126
of the Central Rules, prototype of every type of vehicle is subject to test. The
provisions of Rule 126 intend for fitness of vehicle to be plied on the road by
the agencies which are specified therein. Approval and certification of motor
vehicles for compliance to these rules shall be in accordance with the AIS: 017-
2000. Rule 93 deals with overall dimensions of the motor vehicles such as
width, length, height, overhang etc. No doubt about it that the vehicle has to be
29
in conformity with the rules also but Rules cannot be so interpreted so as to
permit the alteration as prohibited under section 52(1) of the Act. The alteration
under the Rules is permissible except as prohibited by section 52. The
specification of the rules would hold good with respect to the matters as not
specifically covered under section 52(1) and not specified therein by
manufacturer. The emphasis of section 52(1) is not to vary the “original
specifications by the manufacturer”. Remaining particulars in a certificate of
registration can be modified and changed and can be noted in the certificate of
registration as provided in section 52(2), (3) and (5) and the Rules. Under
section 52(5), in case a person is holding a vehicle on a hire purchase
agreement, he shall not make any alteration except with the written consent of
the original owner.
33. In our considered opinion the Division Bench in the impugned judgment
of the High Court of Kerala has failed to give effect to the provisions contained
in section 52(1) and has emphasized only on the Rules. As such, the decision
rendered by the Division Bench cannot be said to be laying down the law
correctly. The Rules are subservient to the provisions of the Act and particulars
in certificate of registration can also be changed except to the extent of the
entries made in the same as per the specifications originally made by the
manufacturer. Circular No.7/2006 is also to be read in that spirit. Authorities to
act accordingly.
30
34. Resultantly, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained and is hereby set
aside. The appeals are allowed.
………………………….J.
(Arun Mishra)
New Delhi; …………………………..J.
January 9, 2019. (Vineet Saran)
Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Rule 126 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and the effect of Rules 96, 103 and 261 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989.- permissible alteration in a Motor Vehicle -The Division Bench of the High Court in the impugned judgment has opined that alteration is not totally prohibited. More so, in view of Rules 96 and 103 of the Kerala Rules, the Registering Authority is competent to consider roadworthiness and safety of the vehicle and it cannot be rendered a mechanical exercise. It is not only to verify as to whether the measurement conforms to the prototype test etc. The Rules provide for the dimensions of the vehicle. Rule 93 is not an enabling provision to make prototype certification. Rule 47(1)(g) of the Central Rules contemplates on road-worthiness certificate in Form 22 from the manufacturers and in Form 22A from the bodybuilders for applying for registration of the motor vehicles. The body can be built on a chassis in compliance with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules framed thereunder. The manufacturer or the authorities specified under Rule 126 do not provide for any prescription as to the dimensions or nature of the body that is to be built on the chassis. The writ petitions have been allowed and orders passed by the Registering Authorities have been quashed.-
Apex court held that What is permitted has been specifically provided for and what has not been specifically stated would obviously be deemed to have been excluded from these Rules. Let us take a few examples. Rule 104 requires that every motor vehicle, other than threewheelers and motorcycles shall be fitted with two red reflectors, one each on both sides at their
rear. Every motorcycle shall be fitted with at least one red reflector at the rear. Rule 104A provides that two white reflex in the front of the vehicle on each side and visible to oncoming
vehicles from the front at night.
Rule 106 deals with deflections of lights and requires that no lamp showing a light to the front shall be used on any motor vehicle including construction equipment vehicle unless such lamp is so constructed, fitted and maintained that the beam of light emitted therefrom is permanently deflected downwards to such an extent that it is not capable of dazzling any person whose eye position is at a distance of 8 meters from the front of lamp etc.
Rules 119 and 120 specify the kind, size, and manner in which the horn and silencer are to be fixed in a vehicle.
These provisions demonstrate the extent of minuteness in the Rules and the efforts of the framers to ensure, not only the appropriate manner of construction and maintenance of the vehicle but also the safety of other users of the road.
It is the duty of all citizens to comply with the law. The Rules are mandatory and nobody has
the authority in law to mould these rules for the purposes of convenience or luxury and certainly not for crime.
As per Section 32(1) and 32(2) of the Old Act, corresponding to Section 52(1) and 52(2) of the new Act, before making any alteration, the owner was required to give notice to the registering authority and obtain permission. The registering authority was required to communicate its approval or disapproval within seven days and if no such communication was served within the period of seven days, approval of such authority to the proposed alteration was deemed to have been given.
Apex court held that
The vehicle has to comply with the provisions of the Rules contained in Chapter V of the Central Rules as provided in Rule 92(1). Rule 92(1) has to be read as subservient to the provisions contained in section 52 of the Act and what is prohibited therein to allow the same is not the intendment of the rules contained in the Chapter. Various provisions in Chapter V are additional safeguards to what is prohibited in section 52(1) that is to say, what has been specified originally by the manufacturers and once that has been entered in the particulars in the certificate of registration, cannot be varied. No vehicle can be altered so as to change original specification made by manufacturer. Such particulars cannot be altered which have been specified by the manufacturer for the purpose of entry in the certificate of registration. It is provided in Rule 126 of the Central Rules, prototype of every type of vehicle is subject to test. The provisions of Rule 126 intend for fitness of vehicle to be plied on the road by the agencies which are specified therein. Approval and certification of motor vehicles for compliance to these rules shall be in accordance with the AIS: 017-2000. Rule 93 deals with overall dimensions of the motor vehicles such as width, length, height, overhang etc. No doubt about it that the vehicle has to be in conformity with the rules also but Rules cannot be so interpreted so as to permit the alteration as prohibited under section 52(1) of the Act. The alteration under the Rules is permissible except as prohibited by section 52. The specification of the rules would hold good with respect to the matters as not specifically covered under section 52(1) and not specified therein by manufacturer. The emphasis of section 52(1) is not to vary the “original specifications by the manufacturer”. Remaining particulars in a certificate of registration can be modified and changed and can be noted in the certificate of registration as provided in section 52(2), (3) and (5) and the Rules. Under section 52(5), in case a person is holding a vehicle on a hire purchase agreement, he shall not make any alteration except with the written consent of the original owner.
In our considered opinion the Division Bench in the impugned judgment of the High Court of Kerala has failed to give effect to the provisions contained in section 52(1) and has emphasized only on the Rules. As such, the decision rendered by the Division Bench cannot be said to be laying down the law correctly.
The Rules are subservient to the provisions of the Act and particulars in certificate of registration can also be changed except to the extent of the entries made in the same as per the specifications originally made by the manufacturer. Circular No.7/2006 is also to be read in that spirit. Authorities to act accordingly.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra
1
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 219222 OF 2019)
(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (C) NOs.1322813231 OF 2013)
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER & ORS. ETC. ..APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
K. JAYACHANDRA & ANR. ETC. ..RESPONDENT(S)
With C.A. No. 223 of 2019 [@ SLP [C] No.27499/2013]
J U D G M E N T
ARUN MISHRA, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The question involved is as to the permissible alteration in a Motor
Vehicle in view of the provisions contained in section 52 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), Rule 126 of the Central Motor
Vehicles Rules, 1989 and the effect of Rules 96, 103 and 261 of the Kerala
Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. The Central Government has framed the rules called
Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 (for short “the Central Rules”) in exercise of
the power conferred under section 27 of the Act, and in exercise of powers
conferred under Section 28 of the Act, the Kerala Government has framed the
2
Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Kerala
Rules”). The validity of Circular No.7/2006 issued by the Transport
Commissioner, Kerala to all the Registering Authorities stating that the body of
the vehicle constructed in violation of the prototype test certificate and which
was not built in strict compliance of the specifications given by the
manufacturer are to be denied the registration. Pursuant thereto the Regional
Transport Authorities did not grant permission to certain motor vehicles in view
of the provisions contained in section 52 and the Circular. As such several writ
petitions came to be filed in the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam.
3. In Writ Petition (C) No.29946 of 2006 decided on 16.1.2007 by the
learned Single Judge it was held that Rule 126 of the Central Rules does not
fetter the powers of the Regional Transport Authorities to intelligently exercise
their discretion in terms of the Kerala Rules, in particular Rules 96, 103 and
261; whereas a contrary view was taken by another Single Judge vide order
dated 23.5.2007 in Writ Petition (C) No.8836 of 2007 and it was observed that
the alteration in derogation of prototype test in terms of Rule 126 of the Central
Rules cannot be approved.
4. Writ Petition (C) No.28702 of 2007 for quashing Circular No.7/2006 and
the order passed on 3.7.2007 declining registration was filed.
5. Writ Petition (C) Nos.1323 of 2010 and 1468/2010 were filed with
respect to the denial of registration by the Registering Authorities as the body
3
built over the chassis extended by a length of 15 cms. beyond the chassis which
was not adhering to the specifications given by the manufacturer of the vehicle.
6. Writ Petition (C) No.274 of 2012 was filed by the owner of the vehicle to
question denial of registration in view of the aforesaid rule and the Circular. Yet
another Writ Petition (C) No.274 of 2012 was filed against the refusal to grant
registration of a vehicle which was re-modelled as a ‘recovery vehicle’ altered
in an unauthorised manner by cutting the chassis of the vehicle by one feet at
the rear end which was not in conformity with the prototype test in terms of
Rule 126 of the Central Rules.
7. In view of the conflict in judgments in Writ Petition (C) No.29946 of
2006 and Writ Petition (C) No.8836 of 2007 regarding the issue of alteration
whether alteration is permissible at variance with the manufacturer’s
specification contained in the prototype test certification, the matter was
referred to a Division Bench of the High Court. The High Court by the common
judgment passed in the writ petitions came to the conclusion that structural
alteration is permissible as per the provisions of the Kerala Rules. The view
taken by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (C) No.29946 of 2006 has
been upheld hence the appeals have been preferred in this Court. This Court has
stayed the operation of the impugned judgment and order on 16.4.2013.
Considering the importance of the matter notice was issued to the Ministry of
4
Road Transport and Highways through its Secretary, and Mr. K.V. Viswanathan,
learned senior counsel was appointed as amicus curiae to assist the Court.
8. It is apparent from the factual matrix of Writ Petition (C) No.28702 of
2007 that it was a case of medium commercial bus chassis. The registration was
declined on the ground that the platform of the bus was extended to a distance
of 37 cms. and the body was having an extension of 39 cms. from the extreme
rear end of the chassis. The vehicle had an extended length of 39 cms. The
technical specifications of model TATA bus chassis have specified length of
757.5 cm. After the body was built, it had a total length of 796.5 cm.
9. Similarly, in Writ Petition (C) No.1323 of 2010 and Writ Petition (C)
No.1468 of 2010, the body was built over the chassis extended by 15 cm.
beyond the chassis. In Writ Petition (C) No.274 of 2012 the vehicle was remodeled as a recovery vehicle by cutting the chassis of the vehicle by one foot
at the rear end. In Writ Petition (C) No.29946 of 2006, the unladen weight of the
vehicle before alteration was 2315 kg. and the same had been increased on
alteration to 2715 kgs. Besides, there were changes in the measurement of the
body which resulted in declining the permission for registration. In Writ Petition
(C) No.8836 of 2007, the length of the chassis of the vehicle as per prototype
was 832.5 cm. but after building the body it was found to have been extended to
885 cm.
5
10. Section 52 of the Act deals with alteration in the motor vehicle. Prior to
that, provision with respect to alteration in motor vehicles was contained in
section 32 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. Section 32 of the Act of 1939 is
extracted hereunder:
“SECTION 32: ALTERATION IN MOTOR VEHICLE
(1) No owner of a motor vehicle shall so alter the vehicle that the
particulars contained in the certificate of registration are no
longer accurate, unless
(a) he has given notice to the registering authority within whose
jurisdiction he resides of the alteration he proposes to make,
and
(b) he has obtained the approval of the registering authority to
make such alteration:
Provided that it shall not be necessary to obtain such approval
for making any change in the unladen weight of the motor
vehicle consequent on the addition or removal of fittings or
accessories if Such change does not exceed two percent. of the
weight entered in the certificate of registration.
(2) Where a registering authority has received notice under subsection (1), it shall, within seven days of the receipt thereof,
communicate, by post, to the owner of the vehicle its approval to
the proposed alteration or otherwise:
Provided that where the owner of the motor vehicle has not
received any such communication within the said period of
seven days, the approval of such authority to the proposed
alteration shall be deemed to have been given.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), a
State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,
authorise, subject to such conditions as may be specified in the
notification, the owners of not less than ten transport vehicles to
alter any vehicle owned by them so as to change its engine
number by replacing the engine thereof without the approval of
the registering authority.
(4) Where any alteration has been made in a motor vehicle either
with the approval of the registering authority given or deemed to
have been given under subsection (2) or by reason of any
change in its engine number without such approval under sub
6
section (3), the owner of the vehicle shall within fourteen days of
the making of the alteration, report the alteration to the
registering authority within whose jurisdiction he resides and
shall forward the certificate of registration to that authority
together with the prescribed fee in order that particulars of the
alteration may be entered therein.
(5) A registering authority other than the original registering
authority making any such entry shall communicate the details
of the entry to the original registering authority.”
(emphasis supplied)
11. The alteration in a motor vehicle under the parent Act is dealt with in
section 52 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Section 52 as originally enacted is
extracted hereunder:
"52. Alternation in a motor vehicle .
(1) No owner of a motor vehicle shall so alter the vehicle that
the particulars contained in the certificate of registration are
no longer accurate, unless.
(a) he has given notice to the registering authority within
whose jurisdiction he has the residence or the place of
business where the vehicle is normally kept, as the case may
be of the alteration he proposes to make; and
(b) he has obtained the approval of that registering authority
to make such alteration:
Provided that it shall not be necessary to obtain such
approval for making any change in the unladen weight of the
motor vehicle consequent on the addition or removal of
fittings or accessories if such change does not exceed two
percent of the weight entered in the certificate of registration.
Provided further that modification of the engine, or any
part thereof, of a vehicle for facilitating its operation by a
different type of fuel or source of energy including battery,
compressed natural gas, solar power or any other fuel or
source of energy other than liquid petroleum gas shall be
treated as an alteration but that shall be subject to such
conditions as may be prescribed.
(2) Where a registering authority has received notice under
subsection (1), it shall, within seven days of the receipt
thereof, communicate, by post, to the owner of the vehicle its
approval to the proposed alteration or otherwise:
7
Provided that where the owner of the motor vehicle has not
received any such communication within the said period of
seven days, the approval of such authority to the proposed
alteration shall be deemed to have been given.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), a
State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,
authorise, subject to such conditions as may be specified in
the notification, the owners of not less than ten transport
vehicles to alter any vehicle owned by them so as to change
its engine number by replacing the engine thereof without the
approval of the registering authority.
(4) Where any alteration has been made in a motor vehicle
either with the approval of the registering authority given or
deemed to have been given under subsection (2) or by reason
of any change in its engine number without such approval
under subsection (3), the owner of the vehicle shall within
fourteen days of the making of the alteration, report the
alteration to the registering authority within whose
jurisdiction he resides and shall forward the certificate of
registration to that authority together with the prescribed fee
in order that particulars of the alteration may be entered
therein.
(5) A registering authority other than the original registering
authority making any such entry shall communicate the
details of the entry to the original registering authority.
(6) No person holding a vehicle under a hirepurchase
agreement shall make any alteration to the vehicle for which
approval of the registering authority is required under subsection (1) except with the written consent of the registered
owner.”
(emphasis supplied)
12. Section 52 has undergone change by way of Amendment Act 27/2000.
The Statement of Objects and Reasons of Amendment Act 27/2000 is extracted
hereunder:
“Amendment Act 27 of 2000 – Statement of Objects and
Reasons. – The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 consolidated and
rationalized various laws regulating road transport. The said Act
was amended in 1994.
2. Further amendments in the aforesaid Act have become
necessary so as to reduce the vehicular pollution and to ensure
the safety of the road users. It is, therefore, proposed to prohibit
alteration of vehicles in any manner including change of tyres of
higher capacity. However, the alteration of vehicles with a view
to facilitating the use of ecofriendly fuel including Liquefied
8
Petroleum Gas (LPG) is being permitted. Further, it is proposed
to confer powers on the Central Government to allow the
alteration of vehicles for certain specified purposes.
3. At present, the educational institutions are not required to
obtain permits for the operation of buses owned by them. It is
proposed to bring the buses run by these institutions within the
purview of the aforesaid Act by requiring them to obtain permits.
4. It is also proposed to allow renewal of permits, driving
licences and registration certificates granted under the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1939 to be renewed under the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988, by inserting new section 217 – A.
5. The proposed amendments are essential in the overall interest
of securing road safety and maintaining a clean environment.”
(emphasis supplied)
13. It is apparent that section 52 has been amended with the purpose to
prohibit alteration of vehicles in any manner including change of tyres of higher
capacity, keeping in view road safety and protection of environment. Section 52
has been amended by virtue of Amendment Act 27/2000 in the following
manner:
“52. Alteration in a motor vehicle. –
(1) No owner of a motor vehicle shall so alter the vehicle that the
particulars contained in the certificate of registration are at
variance with those originally specified by the manufacturer:
Provided that where the owner of a motor vehicle makes
modification of the engine, or any part thereof of a vehicle for
facilitating its operation by different type of fuel or source of
energy including battery, compressed natural gas, solar power,
liquid petroleum gas or any other fuel or source of energy, by
fitment of a conversion kit, such modification shall be carried
out subject to such conditions as may be prescribed:
Provided further that the Central Government may prescribe
specifications conditions for approval, retrofitment and other
related matters for such conversion kits;
Provided also that the Central Government may grant an
exemption for alteration of vehicles in a manner other than
specified above, for any specific purpose.
9
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), a
State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,
authorise, subject to such conditions as may be specified in the
notifications, and permit any person owning not less than ten
transport vehicles to alter any vehicle owned by him so as to
replace the engine thereof with engine of the same make and
type, without the approval of registering authority.
(3) Where any alteration has been made in a motor vehicle
without the approval of registering authority or by reason of
replacement of its engine without such approval under subsection
(2), the owner of the vehicle shall, within fourteen days of the
making of the alteration, report the alteration to the registering
authority within whose jurisdiction he resides and shall forward
the certificate of registration to that authority together with the
prescribed fee in order that particulars of registration may be
entered therein.
(4) A registering authority other than the original registering
authority making any such entry shall communicate the details
of the entry to the original registering authority.
(5) Subject to the provisions made under subsection (1), (2), (3)
and (4), no person holding a vehicle under a hirepurchase
agreement shall make any alteration to the vehicle except with
the written consent of the registered owner.
Explanation. For the purpose of this section, “alteration”
means a change in the structure of a vehicle which results in
change in its basic feature.”
(emphasis supplied)
14. Rule 126 of the Central Rules deals with the prototype of every motor
vehicle to be subject to test. Rule 126 is extracted hereunder:
“126. Prototype of every motor vehicle to be subject to
test. On and from the date of commencement of Central Motor
Vehicles (Amendment) Rules, 1993, every [manufacturer or
importer] of motor vehicles [including trailers, semi trailers and
modular hydraulic trailer] [including registered association
(identified by the concerned State Transport Department) for Erickshaw wherever applicable] shall submit the prototype of the
vehicle [to be manufactured or imported by him] for test by the
Vehicle Research and Development Establishment of the
Ministry of Defence of the Government of India or Automotive
Research Association of India, Pune, [or the Central Farm
Machinery Testing and Training Institute, Budni (MP)], or the
Indian Institute of Petroleum, Dehradun, [or the Central
Institute of Road Transport", Pune, or the International Centre
10
for Automotive Technology, Manesar,] [or the Northern Region
Farm Machinery Training and Testing Institute, Hissar (for
testing of combine harvester) and such other agencies as may be
specified by the Central Government for granting a certificate by
that agency as to the compliance of provisions of the Act and
these rules:]
[Provided that the procedure for type approval and
certification of motor vehicles for compliance to these rules shall
be in accordance with the AIS:0172000, as amended from time
to time:]
[Provided further that in respect to the vehicles imported into
India as completely built units (CBU), the importer shall submit
a vehicle of that particular model and type to the testing
agencies for granting a certificate by that agency as to the
compliance to the provision of the Act and these rules.]
[126A. The testing agencies referred to in rule 126 shall in
accordance with the procedures laid down by the Central
Government also conduct tests on vehicles drawn from the
production line of the manufacturer to verify whether these
vehicles conform to the provisions of [rules made under section
110 of the Act]:]
[Provided that in case the number of vehicles sold in India for
a given base model and its variants (manufactured in India or
imported to India) are less than 250 in any consecutive period of
six months in a year, then such base model and its variants
need not be subjected to the above test, if at least one model or
its variants manufactured or imported by that manufacturer or
importer, as the case may be, is subjected to such tests at least
once in a year:
Provided further that, in case the number of base models and
its variants manufactured/imported is more than one and if the
individual base model and its variants are less than 250 in any
consecutive period of six months in a year, then the testing
agencies can pick up one of the vehicles out of such models and
their variants once in a year for carrying out such test.] ”
15. Rule 93 deals with the overall dimension of motor vehicles. The Rule
prescribes the overall width, overall length, and overall height etc. Rule 93(1)
deals with overall width. Rule 93(2) with overall length. Rule 93(4) with overall
height. Rule 93(6) with overhang etc.
11
16. The relevant Rules 96, 103 and 261 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules,
1989, providing for inspection of vehicles, recording alteration and body
construction are extracted hereunder:
“96. Inspection of vehicle prior to Registration: (1) Inspecting
Officer. The Registering Authority or such authority as the
Government may by order appoint shall inspect the vehicle as
required by section 44 of the Act.
(2) Production of vehicle for inspection: The vehicle shall be
produced for inspection along with the required documents for
registration, before the inspecting officer, for comparative
scrutiny of the particulars contained in the application with the
physical features of the vehicles, and for ascertaining its fitness
for use in public place.
(3) Report of Inspecting Officer: The Inspecting Officer after
making modifications deemed necessary in the particulars
contained in the application, shall certify therein regarding the
correctness of the entries and the fitness of the vehicle:
Provided that in the case of a transport vehicle, or for any
other vehicle of which the body is not factorybuilt or a
stereotyped pattern previously approved by the Registering
Authority, he shall prepare and issue a measurement certificate
in Form "MC" and a sketch showing therein the seating
arrangements, dimensions and other relevant particulars under
Chapter VII of these rules. The Inspecting Officer shall
simultaneously forward a copy each of the measurement
certificate and sketch to the concerned Registering Authority
also.
103. Recording alteration to a motor vehicle: (1) Ascertaining
suitability of alteration – The Registering Authority may require
inspection of the vehicle by himself or by any other Inspector of
motor vehicles to satisfy that any alteration made is suitable.
The owner of the vehicle shall, on demand, produce the vehicle
for inspection.
(2) The Inspecting Officer shall prepare and issue a fresh
measurement certificate in Form “MC” and a sketch showing
therein the seating arrangement, dimensions etc., as found on
inspection in the following circumstances:
12
(a) When consequent to any structural alteration made in a
motor vehicle the particulars of registration noted in one or more
of items 1, 3, 11, 13 & 19 of the certificate of registration are no
longer accurate.
(b) When consequent to any rearrangement of loading space or
seats, their position or dimensions are altered though such
arrangement does not affect the registration particulars referred
to in clause (a) above.
261. Body construction: The body of every transport
vehicle shall be soundly constructed and securely fastened to
the frame of the vehicle and in accordance with the
specifications, if any, laid down by the State or Regional
Transport Authority.”
(emphasis supplied)
17. The Division Bench of the High Court in the impugned judgment has
opined that alteration is not totally prohibited. More so, in view of Rules 96 and
103 of the Kerala Rules, the Registering Authority is competent to consider
roadworthiness and safety of the vehicle and it cannot be rendered a mechanical
exercise. It is not only to verify as to whether the measurement conforms to the
prototype test etc. The Rules provide for the dimensions of the vehicle. Rule 93
is not an enabling provision to make prototype certification. Rule 47(1)(g) of
the Central Rules contemplates on road-worthiness certificate in Form 22 from
the manufacturers and in Form 22A from the bodybuilders for applying for
registration of the motor vehicles. The body can be built on a chassis in
compliance with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules framed
thereunder. The manufacturer or the authorities specified under Rule 126 do not
provide for any prescription as to the dimensions or nature of the body that is to
13
be built on the chassis. The writ petitions have been allowed and orders passed
by the Registering Authorities have been quashed.
18. It was urged by Mr. K.V. Viswanathan, learned senior counsel appearing
as amicus curiae that the provisions contained in section 52 of the Act and Rule
126, as well as the Kerala Rules, have not been correctly interpreted by the High
Court. It is not permissible to make alteration under the Rules in contravention
of the provisions contained in section 52 of the Act. The provisions of the Act
and the Rules have been enacted for the purpose of safety on the roads and
environment and it is not permissible to alter the vehicle in derogation to the
provisions of the Act. He has referred to a plethora of decisions and has also
attracted the attention of this Court towards the pending Motor Vehicles
Amendment) Bill, 2017 and the extracts of 243rd Report of the Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism and Culture on the Motor Vehicles
(Amendment) Bill, 2016.
19. Mr. Aman Lekhi, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on
behalf of the Ministry of Transport contended that the correct interpretation of
the amended provisions in section 52 has not been made by the High Court. He
has also attracted our attention to the Rules.
20. In Avishek Goenka (1) v. Union of India & Anr. (2012) 5 SCC 321, a
question came up for consideration with respect to Rule 100 of the Central
Rules prescribing a standard for safety. This Court held the same to be a valid
14
piece of legislation. The object of the Act also came up for consideration and the
Court observed that the legislative intent attaching due significance to the
“public safety” is evident from the Objects and Reasons of the Act. The Court
should give an interpretation of the Rules which would serve the legislative
intent and the object of framing such Rules, in preference to the one which
would defeat the very purpose of enacting the Rules as well as undermining the
public safety and interest. This Court considered the provisions contained in
section 52, Rules 92 and 100 of the Central Rules and observed thus:
“18. From the above provisions, it is clear that the Rules deal
with every minute detail of construction and maintenance of a
vehicle. In other words, the standards, sizes, and specifications
which the manufacturer of a vehicle is required to adhere to
while manufacturing the vehicle are exhaustively dealt with
under the Rules. What is permitted has been specifically
provided for and what has not been specifically stated would
obviously be deemed to have been excluded from these Rules. It
would neither be permissible nor possible for the Court to read
into these statutory provisions, what is not specifically provided
for. These are the specifications which are in consonance with
the prescribed IS No. 2553Part 2 of 1992 and nothing is
ambiguous or uncertain.
19. Let us take a few examples. Rule 104 requires that every
motor vehicle, other than threewheelers and motorcycles shall
be fitted with two red reflectors, one each on both sides at their
rear. Every motorcycle shall be fitted with at least one red
reflector at the rear. Rule 104A provides that two white reflex in
the front of the vehicle on each side and visible to oncoming
vehicles from the front at night.
20. Rule 106 deals with deflections of lights and requires that
no lamp showing a light to the front shall be used on any motor
vehicle including construction equipment vehicle unless such
lamp is so constructed, fitted and maintained that the beam of
light emitted therefrom is permanently deflected downwards to
such an extent that it is not capable of dazzling any person
whose eye position is at a distance of 8 meters from the front of
15
lamp etc. Rules 119 and 120 specify the kind, size, and manner
in which the horn and silencer are to be fixed in a vehicle.
21. These provisions demonstrate the extent of minuteness in
the Rules and the efforts of the framers to ensure, not only the
appropriate manner of construction and maintenance of the
vehicle but also the safety of other users of the road.
28. The legislative intent attaching due significance to the 'public
safety' is evident from the object and reasons of the Act, the
provisions of the Act and more particularly, the Rules framed
thereunder. Even if we assume, for the sake of argument, that
Rule 100 is capable of any interpretation, then this Court should
give it an interpretation which would serve the legislative intent
and the object of framing such rules, in preference to one which
would frustrate the very purpose of enacting the Rules as well as
undermining the public safety and interest.
32. In the present case as well, even if some individual interests
are likely to suffer, such individual or private interests must give
in to the larger public interest. It is the duty of all citizens to
comply with the law. The Rules are mandatory and nobody has
the authority in law to mould these rules for the purposes of
convenience or luxury and certainly not for crime.”
21. It has been observed that the Rules deal in minute details with the
construction and maintenance of the vehicle. Rules also deal with the safety of
other users on the road. If some individual interest is likely to suffer, such
individual interest must give way to the larger public interest.
22. Before dilating further upon the issue we take note of the decision in R.
Ramasamy v. The Secretary, Ministry of Transport, Chennai & Ors. (2009) 1
Mad.LJ 1027 wherein the Madras High Court has considered the provisions of
section 52(1)(a) as amended by Act 27/2000 and has opined thus:
“8.4 A comparison of the aforesaid provisions makes it clear that
Section 32(1)(a) and (b) of the Old Act along with the proviso had
been practically reenacted as Section 52(1)(a) and (b) of the New
Act. However, in the New Act, a second proviso was added which
16
permitted modification of the engine for facilitating its operation
by a different type of fuel. Section 32(2) of the Old Act along with
the proviso was reenacted as Section 52(2) of the New Act. As
per Section 32(1) and 32(2) of the Old Act, corresponding to
Section 52(1) and 52(2) of the new Act, before making any
alteration, the owner was required to give notice to the
registering authority and obtain permission. The registering
authority was required to communicate its approval or
disapproval within seven days and if no such communication
was served within the period of seven days, approval of such
authority to the proposed alteration was deemed to have been
given. Section 32(3) of the Old Act corresponding to Section 52(3)
of the New Act, contained an enabling provision whereunder the
State Government could authorize the owners having ten or
more transport vehicles to change its engine number by
replacing such engine without the approval of the registering
authority. Section 32(4) of the Old Act corresponding to Section
52(4) of the New Act, cast a duty on the owner of the vehicle to
report the alteration made with actual or deemed approval as
contemplated under Section 32(2) of the Old Act corresponding
to Section 52(2) of the new Act or, and without approval as
contemplated under Section 32(3) of the Old Act corresponding
to Section 52(3) of the New Act "in order that particulars of the
alteration may be entered in the certificate of registration".
Section 32(5) of the Old Act corresponding to Section 52(5) of the
New Act envisaged that the registering authority making any
such entry should communicate the details of the entry to the
original registering authority. Section 52(6) of the New Act
contained a new provision laying down that a person holding a
vehicle under a hire purchase agreement cannot make the
alterations contemplated in Section 52(1) of the New Act without
the written consent of the registered owner.
8.5 After amendment of Section 52 of the New Act under Act 27
of 2000, Section 52(1) has been retained as Section 52(1) with
significant modification. It is important to notice that the
provisions contained in Section 32(1)(a) & (b) of the Old Act
corresponding to Section 52(1)(a) & (b) of the New Act relating to
giving of notice and obtaining of approval of the registering
authority have been deleted in the Amended Act. The amended
section does not contain any provision relating to giving of notice
or obtaining of approval. The first proviso to Section 52(1) of the
New Act has also been deleted and the second proviso to Section
52(1) of the New Act relating to the modification of engine has
been reenacted as the first proviso to Section 52(1) of the
Amended Act. Moreover, two other provisos have been added to
Section 52(1). Since the earlier provision in Section 52(1)(a) & (b)
17
of the New Act relating to the issuance of notice and approval
have been deleted. Section 52(2) of the New Act which related to
deemed approval on expiry of seven days has also been deleted
and Section 52(3) of the New Act has been renumbered as
Section 52(2) of the Amended Act. Section 52(4) of the New Act
has been reenacted with certain changes as Section 52(3) of the
Amended Act requiring the owner to report regarding the
alteration to the registering authority. Under Section 52(4) of the
New Act, the owner was required to report about the alteration,
made either with the approval or deemed approval of the
registering authority, or by reason of replacement of engine,
without such approval, to the registering authority within whose
jurisdiction he resided and shall forward the certificate of
registration to that authority together with the prescribed fee "in
order that particulars of the alteration may be entered therein".
8.6 A minute examination of the provisions makes it clear that
the expression "particulars of the alteration may be entered
therein" as contained in Section 52(4) of the New Act, now reads
as "in order that particulars of the registration may be entered
therein" in the Amended Act. It is crystal clear that the word
"registration" in the Amended Act is an obvious typographical
mistake, which has been inadvertently incorporated instead of
the word "alteration". What is intended is that the particulars of
the alteration made in a vehicle should be incorporated in the
certificate of registration.
8.7 Sections 52(5) and 52(6) of the New Act, have been now reenacted as Sections 52(4) and 52(5) of the Amended Act
respectively. The Amended Act, however, contains an important
explanation, which was absent in the Old Act or the New Act.
The explanation is to the effect that, for the purpose of Section
52, "alteration" means a change in the structure of a vehicle
which results in a change in its basic feature.
9. Section 52(1) of the Amended Act obviously is not very happily
worded. By altering the vehicle the particulars contained in the
certificate of registration cannot be a variance with those
specified by the manufacturers. The certificate of registration
contains some of the vital particulars of the vehicles. The real
meaning is that the particulars of alteration to be incorporated
in the Certificate of Registration as contemplated in Section
52(3) of the Amended Act are at variance with those originally
specified by the manufacturer. When the provision is read in the
light of the explanation, it is obvious that changes or
modification which do not result in a change in basic feature
18
need not be considered as an alteration within the meaning of
Section 52 of the Amended Act.
……
11.1 A comparison of the relevant provisions contained in the
Old Act and the New Act with the provisions of the Amendment
Act clearly indicates that the Legislature has dispensed with the
requirement of obtaining permission relating to every change or
modification effected in a motor vehicle. In fact, the 1988 Act
itself has been amended in such a manner as to make it
unnecessary for seeking permission to make such minor change
or modification. Moreover, every minor change or modification is
not necessarily considered as an alteration within the meaning
of Section 52 of the Amended Act. In the present case, the RTO
has practically applied the provisions, which were available
before the amendment was effected in 2000, without taking note
of such amendment.”
23 It has been observed by the High Court of Madras that an alternation in
the vehicle is not permissible which may be at variance with the particulars
contained in the certificate of registration which contains vital particulars of the
vehicle and the permissible changes or modifications and which do not result in
change in the basic feature, need not be considered as alternation within the
meaning of section 52 of the Amended Act.
24. The decision in the case of K.S. Rajesh Kumar v. The Additional
Registering Authority of Kerala High Court delivered on 1.2.2010 has also been
referred to wherein the question of alteration in the vehicle came up for
consideration. The passenger vehicle was purchased as defined in section 2(17)
of the M.V. Act. The petitioner wanted to convert the same into the vehicle that
could be used as a cinema outdoor unit by fixing a generator set therein. The
Court held that the petitioner has not made any alteration to either the chassis or
19
the body of the vehicle as the manufacturer has manufactured only the chassis
of the vehicle and not its superstructure. In place of the seats meant for
passengers, the petitioner was fitting only a generator which alteration was
permissible. There was no violation of the provisions of section 52.
25. The decision in Mohd. Javeed v. Union of India & Ors. (2001) 9 ALD 88
= 2009 1 ALT 507 has also been referred by the learned amicus curiae. In the
said case chassis were changed. The Court held that the chassis is the base
frame of a motor vehicle and no doubt is an important feature of the vehicle.
Whether the change of the chassis would amount to change in the structure of
the vehicle. The replacement became necessary on account of the accident.
There was no other change in the structure of the vehicle. It was held that
section 52(3) enables the owner of the vehicle to replace the engine of the
vehicle but the factum of replacement has to be reported to the Authority within
14 days. On the same analogy, the Court held that the chassis was changed by
the manufacturer with the approval of the insurance company and the bank and
change became necessary due to the damage caused to the chassis owing to the
accident. Thus the refusal of registration was held to be bad in law and set aside.
In fact, there was no change of chassis except the replacement in the said case.
26. The decision in V.N. Dharmakrishnan v. Deputy Commissioner of
Transport, AIR 2006 Mad. 340 has also been placed for consideration. The
question arose whether a Delivery Van Goods Carrier can be altered as an
20
ambulance. The Court held it to be a clear violation of the provisions of the
M.V. Act and using goods carriage as an ambulance for which permit had
already been canceled, cannot be condoned on the ground that the 5th respondent
was rendering some free service. The decision turned on its own facts.
27. The very object of the amendment of section 52(1) by Act 27/2000 is to
prohibit alteration of a vehicle as provided including the change of tyres of
higher capacity. The amended section 52(1) has specified the extent to which
vehicle cannot be altered. A reading of the provisions makes it clear that no
vehicle can be altered in a manner where particulars in the certificate of
registration are at variance with those “originally specified by the
manufacturer”. The proviso to sub-section (1) permits modification of the
engine, or any part thereof, of a vehicle for facilitating its operation by a
different type of fuel or source of energy including battery etc., such
modification is permissible to be carried out subject to such conditions as may
be prescribed. The second proviso to section 52(1) empowers the Central
Government to prescribe specifications, conditions for approval, retro-fitment
and other related matters for such conversion kits. The Central Government has
power to grant an exemption for alteration of vehicles for any specific purpose.
Section 52(2) authorizes a State Government to issue a notification and permit
any person owning not less than 10 transport vehicles to alter any vehicle
owned by him so as to replace the ‘engine’ with an engine of the same make and
21
type, without the approval of the Registering Authority. Section 52(3) provides
that where the alteration has been made without the approval of the Registering
Authority, obviously the one which is permissible in the motor vehicle, the
owner of the vehicle has to report the same within 14 days to make an entry in
the particulars of the registration. The provisions of section 52(2), (3), (4) and
(5) have to be read harmoniously. The Explanation to section 52 says that
“alteration” means a change in the structure of a vehicle which results in a
change in its basic feature. The alterations which do not change the basic
features are outside the purview of alteration.
28. The object and the clear intent of amended section 52 is that the vehicle
cannot be so altered that the particulars contained in the certificate of
registration are at variance with those “originally specified by the
manufacturer”. The manufacturer issues sale certificate in Form 21 which has
been framed under Rule 47(1)(a) of the Central Rules. Rule 47(1)(a) is extracted
hereunder :
“47. Application for registration of motor vehicles. (1) An
application for registration of a motor vehicle shall be made in
Form 20 to the registering authority within a period of 1[seven
days] from the date of taking delivery of such vehicle,
excluding the period of journey and shall be accompanied by
(a) sale certificate in Form 21;”
29. The particulars are to be specified by the manufacturer. An application for
registration of the motor vehicle has to be filed in Form 20. It has to accompany
22
a sale certificate issued by the manufacturer or dealer etc. as the case may be as
provided in Rule 47(1)(a) and (d). Form 20 is extracted hereunder:
“APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF A MOTOR VEHICLE
(To be made in duplicate if the vehicle is held under an agreement of HirePurchase/Lease/Hypothecation and a duplicate copy with the endorsement of the Registering
Authority to be returned to the Financier simultaneously on Registration of motor vehicle)
To
The Registering Authority,
.................................
1. Full name of person to be registered as Registered
Owner son/Wife/daughter of ............................
2. Age of person to be registered as Registered owner ...........................
3. Permanent address
(Electoral Roll/Life Insurance Policy/Passport/ Pay slip issued by any office of the Central
Government/State Government or a local body/ Any other document on documents as may be
prescribed by the State Government/Affidavit sworn before an Executive Magistrate or a First
Class Judicial Magistrate or a Notary Public to be enclosed)
............................
4. Temporary address/ Official address, if any ............................
5. Duration of stay at the present address ............................
6. PAN number (optional) ............................
7. Place of birth ............................
8. If place of birth is outside India, when migrated to India ...........................
9. (Omitted) . ..........................
10. Name and address of the Dealer or Manufacturer
from whom the vehicle was purchased (sale certificate
and certificate of roadworthiness issued by the
manufacturer to be enclosed) …………………
11. If ex-army vehicle or imported vehicle, enclose proof.
If Locally manufactured Trailer/Semi-trailer, enclose the
Approval of design by the State Transport Authority and
note the proceedings number and date of approval ............................
12. Class of vehicle (if motorcycle, whether with or without gear ............................
23
13. The motor vehicle is ............................
(a) a new vehicle, ..............
(b) ex-army vehicle, ..............
(c) imported vehicle ..............
(d) in-use E-rickshaw or E-cart ………………
14. Type of body ............................
15. Type of vehicle ............................
16. Maker's name ............................
17. Month and year of manufacture ............................
18. Number of cylinders ............................
19. Horse power ............................
20. Cubic capacity ............................
21. Maker's classification or if not known, wheel base ............................
22. Chassis No. (Affix Pencil print) ............................
23. Engine Number or Motor Number in case of
Battery Operated Vehicles
............................
24. Seating capacity (including driver) ............................
25. Fuel used in the engine ...........................
26. Unladen weight ............................
27. Particulars of previous registration and registered number (if any) ............................
28. Colour or colours of body wings and front end ............................
I hereby declare that the motor vehicle has not been registered in any State in India.
ADDITIONAL PARTICULARS TO BE COMPLETED ONLY IN THE CASE OF
TRANSPORT VEHICLES OTHER THAN MOTOR CAB
29. Number, description, size and ply rating of tyres, as declared by the manufacturer
(a) Front axle = ...............................
(b) Rear axle = ................................
(c) Any other axle = .........................
24
(d) Tandem axle = ............................
30. Gross vehicle weight
(a) as certified by manufacturer ......... Kgms
(b) To be registered ......................... Kgms
31. Maximum axle weight
(a) Front axle= .................................Kgms
(b) Rear axle= .................................Kgms
(c) Any other axle=..........................Kgms
(d) Tandem axle= ...........................Kgms
32. (a) Overall length............................
(b) Overall width...............................
(c) Overall height .............................
(d) Over hang .................................
The above particulars are to be filled in for a rigid frame motor vehicle of two or more axles
for an articulated vehicle of three or more axles or, to the extent applicable, for trailer, where a
second semi-trailer or additional semitrailer are to be registered with an articulated motor
vehicle. The following particulars are to be furnished for each such semi-trailer.
33. Type of body ………………………
34. Unladen weight ……………………...
35. Number, description and size of tyres on each axle ……………………..
36. Maximum axle weight in respect of each axle ……………………..
37. The vehicle is covered by a valid certificate of Insurance under Chapter XI of the Act
Insurance Certificate Or Cover Note
No .............................
Date ........................... of ..............................
(Name of company) Valid from .......... to .......
38. The vehicle is exempted from insurance
The relevant order is enclosed ………………………….
25
39. I have paid the prescribed fee of Rs. .……………………….
Date.............. ……………………………….
Signature or thumb impression of the
person to be registered as registered owner
Note.- The motor vehicle above described is--
(i) Subject to Hire-purchase agreement/lease agreement with ...................................................
(ii) Subject to hypothecation in favour of ............................................................................
(iii) Not held under Hire-purchase agreement, or lease agreement or subject to Hypothecation
Strike out whatever is inapplicable, if the vehicle is subject to any such agreement the signature
of the Financier with whom such agreement has been entered into is to be obtained.
........................................................ ………………………………………
Signature of the financier with whom an Signature or thumb impression of the registered
Agreement of Hire-purchase, Lease owner
or Hypothecation has been entered into.
CERTIFICATE OF INSPECTION OF MOTOR VEHICLE
Certified that the particulars contained in the application are true and that the vehicle
complies with the requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules made
thereunder.
Date .............................
Ref. No..............................
…………………………
Signature of the Inspecting Authority
Name.....................................
Designation ..............................
OFFICE ENDORSEMENT
Office of the..............................
The above-said motor vehicle has been assigned the Registration number.................... and
registered in the name of the applicant and the vehicle is subject to an agreement of Hirepurchase/Lease/Hypothecation with the Financier referred above.
Date......................... ……………………………..
Signature of the Registering Authority
To
26
The Financier ......................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................
(To be sent by registered post acknowledgment due)
Specimen signature or thumb-impression of the person to be registered as Registered Owner
and Financier are to be obtained in original application for affixing and attestation by the
Registering Authority with office seal in Forms 23 and 24 in such a manner that the part of
impression of seal or a stamp and attestation shall fall upon each signature.
Specimen signature of the Financier Specimen Signature of Registered Owner
1) …………………………. 1) ……………………………...
2) ………………………… 2)……………………………….”
30. Form 21 as provided in Rule 47(a) and (d) contain sale certificate issued
by the manufacturer same is extracted hereunder:
“Form 21
SALE CERTIFICATE
(To be issued by manufacturer or dealer or registered E-rickshaw or E-cart Association (in case
of E-rickshaw or E-cart) or officer of Defence Department (in case of military auctioned
vehicles) for presentation along with the application for registration of a motor vehicle).
Certified that........................................................................................................
(brand name of the vehicle) has been delivered by us to.......................................
on................................ (date)
Name of the buyer .....................................................
Son/wife/daughter of .....................................................
Address (Permanent) .....................................................
(Temporary) .....................................................
The vehicle is held under agreement of hire-purchase/lease/hypothecation
with......................................................
The details of the vehicle are given below :
1. Class of vehicle ...................................................
27
2. Maker's name...................................................
3. Chassis No....................................................
4. [Engine number or motor number in the case of Battery Operated
Vehicles] ...................................................
5. Horsepower or cubic capacity...................................................
6. Fuel used ...................................................
7. Number of cylinders ...................................................
8. Month and year of manufacture ...................................................
9. Seating capacity (including driver) ...................................................
10. Unladen weight ……………………..
11. Maximum axle weight and number and description of tyres (in case of transport vehicle)
(a) Front axle……………….
(b) Rear axle ……………….
(c) Any other axle ………….
(d) Tandem axle ……………
12. Colour or colours of the body ………………………..
13. Gross vehicle weight ……………………………
14. Type of body ……………………………………
[Signature of the manufacturer or dealer or Officer
of Defence Department or registered E-rickshaw or
E-cart Association]
*Strike out whichever is inapplicable.”
31. The certificate of registration has to be issued in Form 23 as provided in
Rule 48 of the Central Rules. Rule 48 deals with the issue of the certificate of
registration under Rule 47. Rule 48 is extracted hereunder :
“48. Issue of certificate of registration.-- On receipt of an application
under rule 47 and after verification of the documents furnished
therewith, the registering authority shall, subject to the provisions of
section 44, issue to the owner of the motor vehicle a certificate of
28
registration in Form 23 or Form 23A, as may be specified in the
Notification issued by the concerned State Government or Union
Territory Administration [within the period of thirty days from the
receipt of such an application]:
[Provided that where the certificate of registration pertains to a
transport vehicle it shall be handed over to the registered owner only
after recording the certificate of fitness in Form 38 [within the period
of thirty days from the date of receipt of such an application].]”
32. The vehicle has to comply with the provisions of the Rules contained in
Chapter V of the Central Rules as provided in Rule 92(1). Rule 92(1) has to be
read as subservient to the provisions contained in section 52 of the Act and what
is prohibited therein to allow the same is not the intendment of the rules
contained in the Chapter. Various provisions in Chapter V are additional
safeguards to what is prohibited in section 52(1) that is to say, what has been
specified originally by the manufacturers and once that has been entered in the
particulars in the certificate of registration, cannot be varied. No vehicle can be
altered so as to change original specification made by manufacturer. Such
particulars cannot be altered which have been specified by the manufacturer for
the purpose of entry in the certificate of registration. It is provided in Rule 126
of the Central Rules, prototype of every type of vehicle is subject to test. The
provisions of Rule 126 intend for fitness of vehicle to be plied on the road by
the agencies which are specified therein. Approval and certification of motor
vehicles for compliance to these rules shall be in accordance with the AIS: 017-
2000. Rule 93 deals with overall dimensions of the motor vehicles such as
width, length, height, overhang etc. No doubt about it that the vehicle has to be
29
in conformity with the rules also but Rules cannot be so interpreted so as to
permit the alteration as prohibited under section 52(1) of the Act. The alteration
under the Rules is permissible except as prohibited by section 52. The
specification of the rules would hold good with respect to the matters as not
specifically covered under section 52(1) and not specified therein by
manufacturer. The emphasis of section 52(1) is not to vary the “original
specifications by the manufacturer”. Remaining particulars in a certificate of
registration can be modified and changed and can be noted in the certificate of
registration as provided in section 52(2), (3) and (5) and the Rules. Under
section 52(5), in case a person is holding a vehicle on a hire purchase
agreement, he shall not make any alteration except with the written consent of
the original owner.
33. In our considered opinion the Division Bench in the impugned judgment
of the High Court of Kerala has failed to give effect to the provisions contained
in section 52(1) and has emphasized only on the Rules. As such, the decision
rendered by the Division Bench cannot be said to be laying down the law
correctly. The Rules are subservient to the provisions of the Act and particulars
in certificate of registration can also be changed except to the extent of the
entries made in the same as per the specifications originally made by the
manufacturer. Circular No.7/2006 is also to be read in that spirit. Authorities to
act accordingly.
30
34. Resultantly, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained and is hereby set
aside. The appeals are allowed.
………………………….J.
(Arun Mishra)
New Delhi; …………………………..J.
January 9, 2019. (Vineet Saran)
