Legal Reference Library

Sending out a tough message against under-age driving, the Bombay High Court has directed a Lokhandwala resident to shell out Rs 50,000 as costs, if he wants an FIR against his minor son for rash driving quashed. A division bench of Justice Naresh Patil and Justice Prakash Naik directed Mahesh Chavan to pay the money to Tata Memorial Hospital and Cancer Research Institute, and submit the receipt in order for the criminal proceedings to be dropped. Versova police had lodged an FIR against Chavan's son Nitesh, after he took his father's car for a spin and rammed into a road divider at Lokhandwala in November 2015. Nitesh's friend, who was in the passenger seat, suffered serious injuries and was in hospital for over six months. "We share the concern of the prosecution that a message must go to the society at large," the judges said, adding, "The facts of this case are disturbing in nature. The owner of the vehicle allowed his minor son to drive a four-wheeler ...

The Supreme Court in Sudhakaran vs. Corporation of Kochi has held that the requirement of consent of landlord is applicable only when a person intends to obtain a licence for the first time and not for Renewal or subsequent application for obtaining licence on expiry of the period of the existing licence, during the currency of the tenancy. The Apex Court bench comprising of Justices V. Gopala Gowda and Adarsh Kumar Goel set aside the Division Bench judgment of Kerala High Court, where in it was held that that the consent of the owner of the premises is necessary for renewal of tenant’s licence for running a hardware shop. The Court upheld the order of Tribunal, which had held that renewal cannot be refused only on the ground that the fresh consent was not produced by the statutory tenant. The tenant who had applied for renewal of licence to run a hardware shop was refused by Village Panchayath on the ground that he did not produce ‘consent’ from the land lord. The Tribunal for Local S...

The Delhi High Court has directed the traffic police and transport department not to suspend driving licences without giving alleged violators an opportunity to defend their case. In a significant verdict aimed at preventing harassment of motorist and drivers at the hands of traffic officers, Justice JR Midha directed the traffic police and transport department to “follow due process of law” while prosecuting traffic violators. The court said the transport department has to give particulars of the violation such as date, time and place, and reference to relevant provision violated while issuing ‘show cause notice’ to alleged traffic violators. It said the Motor Licensing Officers will give an opportunity to violators to put up their cases. If it is decided that the licence is to be suspended, the order has to contain reason, the court said. Generally, the traffic police take possession of the driving licence of the violator and forward it to the transport department who take a deci...