BOLANI ORES LTD. ETC. versus STATE OF ORISSA ETC.

Citation: [1975] 2 S.C.R. 138 · Decided: 24-09-1974 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 12 judgment(s) · cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

138 
BOLAN! 'oRES LTD. ETC. 
v. 
STATE OF ORISSA ETC. 
Seprember 24, 1974 
[P. JAGANMOHAN REDDY, M. H. BEG AND ,A. ALAGIRISWAMI, JJ.] 
Motor Ve/lie/es Act, 1939-:-5. 2(18)-"Adapted for 11se"-Mea11i11g of-
Orissa Motor Ve/1icles Taxation Act, 1930-S. 2(c)--Defi11i1io11 by refermce 
-If ame111lme11ls or repeal in tlie Principal Act would affect the provisions in the 
Act i11 irhic/1 they are referred 10. 
The· appellants who owned Dumpers, Rockers and Tractors claimed that 
these machines were not Hable for registration under s. 22 of the Ind•an Motor 
Vehicles Act, 1939 and as such were no1 taxable under s. 6 of the Bihar and 
Orisrn Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1930. 
The trial court helJ that the 
machinery were motor vehicles within the meaning of s. 2(18) of the Motor 
Vehicles Act and were therefore liable for registration under that Act and so 
to payment of tax. 1Jnder. the Taxation Act. The High Court held that unless it 
was shown that the vehicles were of a special type adapted for use only in 
factories or enclosed premises and incapable of running on any other type of 
roads or public roads the vehicks were motor vehicles and that the' three types 
not beinit motor vehicles were not liable for registration under s. 22 of the 
Act nor were they subject to payment of tax under the Taxation Act. 
Section 2 ( c) of the Taxation Act adopted the definition of motor vehicle 
contained in the Motor Vehicles Act. 1914. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1914 
was repealed and replaced oy the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The definition of 
motor vehicle ins. 2(18) of the Motor Vehicles Act having been redefined the 
Taxation Act, by the Orissa Amendment Act 2 of 1940 adopted that definition 
for the purpose of' taxation. The Orissa Amendment Act, 
1943 re·enacted 
provisions of ss. 2 to 8 of the' Taxation Act as the Amendment Act 2 of 1940 
was due· to expire. 
Section 2( 18) of the Motor Vehicles Act was amended bv 
Act l 00 of 1956. 
But there. WalS no corresponding amendment in the dcfi nition 
of s. 2(c) of. the Taxation .Act. 
· 
rt was contrnded in this Cou·rt that under the definition of motor veliicle 
as it existed prior to amendment or subsequent thereto dumpers, rockers and 
tractors were not motor vehicles because they were not adapted for use on the 
road and (2) the definition of motor vehicle in s. 2(c) of the Taxation Act is 
not a definition by incorporation but only a definition by .reference and as such 
the meanin~ of motor vehicle for the purpose of s. 2(c) of the Taxation Act 
would be the same as defined from time to time under ss. 8(2) to 18 of the 
Motor Vehicles Act. 
HELD : Dumpers and rockers though registrable uncrer the Motor ·Vehicles 
Act are not taxable under the Taxation Act as long as \hey are working solely 
within the premises of th1: respective owners. 
So far as the tractairs are con-
cerned thev are neither registrable under the Motor Vehicles Act nor taxabl~ 
under the Taxation Act. [ 160 Fl 
A motor vehicle which is not "adapted for use" upon roads to which 
public have no right of a1:cess is not a motor vehicle within the meaning of s. 
2(18) of the Act. The words "is adapted for use" have the same connotation 
as "is suitable" o'r "is fit'' for use on the roads. The meaning of the word 
"adopted" in s. 2(18) of the Act is itself indicated in entry 57 of List H 
of the 7th Schedule to the Constitution which confers powers on the State to 
tax vehicles whether prop~llecl mechanically or not and uses the words "suit-
able" in relation to its me on the roads. The words "adapted for use" must. 
therefore, be constructed as "suitable for use". 
The words "adapted for use" 
A 
8 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
, 
A 
B 
c 
0 
E 
F 
G 
BOLAN! Oil.ES LTD, V, ORISSA 
13& 
cannot be larger in their import by including vehicles which are not "suitable-
for use" on roads. A perusal of the provisions of the Act would justify trae 
conclusion that it is not necessary,.for other vehicles registered under the Act to· 
.be al.so liable for payment of tax under the Taxation Act. 
[153 G-A; 151 
F'.G.l 
Daley and others v. Hargreaves [1961] l All E.R. 552, MacDonald v. Car· 
micliae/ (1941) S.C. (J) 27, Maddox v. Storer [1963] 1 Q.B. 451 and Bums v. 
Curre// [1963] 2 Q.B. 433, referred to. 
(2) The power of taxation under Entry 57 List _II cannot e~ceed t~e com· 
pensatory nature which must have some nexus wit~ the v~h1cles · usmg the 
public roads. 
If the vehicles do not use roads notw1t~standmg that they are 
registe

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.