LexM/S. SHARMA TRANSPORTS versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2011) 9 S.C.R. 699
.( )
MIS. SHARMA TRANSPORTS
A
v.
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 1507 of 2007)
'
{
AUGUST 02, 2011
B
[G.S. SINGHVI AND H.L. DATTU, JJ.)
Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989: rr.128(9), 93 -
Restriction of carrying luggage on the roof of a tourist vehicle
as provided u/s. 128(9) -
Validity of -
Held: r. 128(9) c
specifically provides that in a tourist vehicle, the permit holder
should only provide luggage holds at the rear or at the sides
,.
or both, of the tourist vehicle with sufficient space and size -
When the Rules specifically make a provision in regard to the
..
place where luggage holds shall be provided by necessary c
implication, it goes to exclude all the other places of the tourist
vehicle for being used as luggage holds - r. 128 is a special
provision for tourist vehicles which excludes general r.93 to
the extent of conflict between the former and the latter - As
regards the question of incorporation of r. 93 into r. 128, it is
E
not the whole r. 93 that is incorporated into r. 128 - Plain
reading of r.93(3) and (3A) shows that these sub-rules are not
-./
applicable to tourist vehicles, as sub-Rule (3) is applicable
,
only to "an articulated vehicle or a tractor-trailer combination
specially constructed and used for the conveyance of F
individual load of exceptional length" and sub-Rule (3A) is
applicable to "construction equipment vehicle" - Only sub-
Rule (1) of r.93, which is in reference to "a motor vehicle~ will
be incorporated and read into r.128 by virtue of sub-Rule (1)
1.,
of r.128 - Therefore, r. 93 must not be fully incorporated into
G
r. 128 so as to imply that the transporters may load goods on
the roof of a tourist vehicle due to the reference to a ladder to
upload luggage found in sub-Rules (3) and (3A) - Both these
sub rules specifically refer to vehicles for carrying heavy loads
699
H
A
B
c
D
E
F
700
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2011) 9 S.C.R.
and not for carrying tourists - Therefore, the luggage of the
passengers may only be stored in the compartments
provided at the sides and/or at the rear of the bus, as the
buses are mandated to provide sufficient space for the storage
of luggage - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Constitution of India, 1950: Article 19(1 )(g) - Restriction
of carrying the luggage on the roof of a tourist vehicle imposed
by r.128(9) of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 -
Reasonableness of - Held: The restriction imposed by
r.128(9) is a reasonable restriction keeping in view the safety
of the passengers in a tourist vehicle - Therefore, the Rule
cannot be said either arbitrary or unreasonable or violative
of Article 19(1)(g).
Interpretation of statutes: Held: The cardinal rule of
interpretation is to allow the general words to take their natural
wide meaning unless the language of the statute gives a
different indication of such meaning and is likely to lead to
absurd result, in which case their meaning can be restricted
by the application of this rule and they may be required to fall
in line with the specific things designated by the preceding
words - When the language used in the statute is clear and
unambiguous, it is the duty of the court to give effect to it -
Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 - r.128(9).
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988: s.2(43) - Expression 'tourist
vehicle' - Meaning of.
The appellants-transporters were the permit holders
of the vehicles registered as tourist vehicles. The
Registration Certificate stated that the vehicles complied
G with all the requirements of Rule 128 of the Central Motor
Vehicles Rules, 1989. Aggrieved with the imposition of
fine for each entry and exit from the transporters for
carrying goods on the roof of the vehicles with tourist
permits, the appellants filed writ petition before the High
H Court. The High Court dismissed the writ petition holding
••
..
'
•
,
,
SHARMA TRANSPORTS v. STATE OF
·701
I( .~
MAHARASHTRA
that by virtue of Rule 128(9) of the Rules, luggage of the
A
passengers could be stored only in the rear and side of
the vehicle and not on the roof of the vehicle .
.;
In the instant appeals, it was contended for the
{
appellants that in Rule 128(9), there was no express bar
B
on carriage of luggage on the roof of the vehicles; that
the Rule provided that the transporters should provide
space for the luggage of the passengers at the rear and
sides of the vehicle, but does not prohibExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.