RAMAUTAR LAL JAIN versus MAYA KAUR & 13 ORS.

Citation: [1974] 3 S.C.R. 931 · Decided: 11-04-1974 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.N. RAY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

931 
A 
RAMAUTAR LAL JAIN 
v. 
MAYA KAUR & 13 ORS. 
April Ir, 1974 
B 
[A. N. RAY, C.J., Y. V. C!IANDRACHUD AND V. R. KRISHNA IYER, JJ.] 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
_Motor Vehicles Act, 1939-Scrt.'on 46-J11ri.1d."ciion of tl1e RegJonal 1'rons-
port .Authority to t1flow substN11ti:)ll of h 'irs of n deceased applicant for stage 
earriage f1ern1its. 
On the question ·whether th::. Rcgiona! Transport Authority had jurisdiction 
under s. 46 or the Motor Vehicles Act to allow or refu3e substitution of heirs in 
the case Of death of an applicant for the grant of stage carriage permit before 
the gr_ant of a permit. 
HELD : The decision of the Appeal Beard as well as of the Minister 
\Vas 
wronll' in holding that the Regiontil 1"ran~Dort Authority had acted beyond juris-
diction. The Regional Transport Authority has jurisdiction and discretion in 
the matter of allowing or refusing substi1ution. 
ln the case Of death. of an 
applicant for the grant of a stage c:irriag~ pcrn1it .b:.-fore the grant of a pern1it, 
the heirs can apply for sub)titution in place of the original applicant. If the 
oroceedinR~ are likely to be delayed or a sub-:tit.ution will br detrimental to the 
interests of the oublic the Regional Tran">port Authority is not bound to allow 
rub1titution. 
There is iurisdictiori to grant or allow or refuse substitution. 
The 
Re~ional Transoort' Anthoritv will exercise di;;cretion in a judicious manner in 
~he facts and circumstances of each case a5 to whether the substitution may be 
nllowed. 
f9i4 C-D; 933 G-HJ 
In the instant case the Regional Trans;>ort Authority granted the permit in 
the name of the firm after observing the procedure prescribed under the Act 
Dha.ni Dt>vi v. Sant Biliari &: Ors., (1969l 2 S.C.R. 507 and Mis. Ram Autar 
Lal Jain v. The Mi11ister of Transport & Ors. C.A. No. 2606 of 1969 decided 
on 28 November. 1973 referred to. 
CML APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal .No. 259J of 1969. 
From the judgmeni and decree dated 24th March, 1967 of the 
Patna High Court in Civil Writ Jurb\liction Case No. 459 of 1966. 
K. K. Sinha and S. K. Sinha, for the app,l\ant. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by:_ 
RAY, C. J. : 
This appeal by certificate is from the judgment dated 
24 March, 1967 of the High Court of .Patna. 
Ram Autar Lal Jain filed an applicafon under section 46 of the 
Motor Vchicfos Acl, ·1939 hereinafter called the Act for grant. of the 
sta~e carria~e permit on the route Da1foo~ani to Mahuataur in Bihar. 
Before .the apnlication coulrl be disnosrd of bv the Revional Trans-
nort Authority Ram Autar Lal Jain died on 1 June, . 1964. There-
~r. Kamal Kum•r rain the .son of R•m Autar Lal Jain made an 
aoolication to Re~ional Transport. A nthnri'" ,tatin~ tha( the annlicR-
tion filed by his deceased father might be treated to be one on bebaif 
of himself and on behalf of his two minor brothers. It was also stated 
in the application that Ram Autar Lal fain had died leaviM his sons ~ 
as h~irs .. On 4 Allj(llst, 1964 another application was filed by Kamal 
932 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1974] 3 S.C.R. 
Kumar Jain praying that the application ftled by the deceased father 
might be treated as the application of a firm called Mis. Ram Autar 
Lal Jain the appellant herein. It was stated there that the three sons 
and the widmif of Ram Autar Lal Jain carried on business in partner-
ship under the name and style of M/s Ram Autar Lal Jain. 
The 
minors were said to be admitted to the benefit of the partnership. On 
receipt of the application the matter was notified in the Bihar Gazette 
on 9 September, I 964 for the purpose of inviting objections, if any. 
No objections were filed. 
On 24 July, 1965 the Transport Authority 
passed an order granting a permit in favour of Mis. Ram Autar Lal 
Jain for the 'route. 
The Appeal Board of the State Transport Authority found that 
the application for permit had been made by Ram Autar Lal Jain and 
that the Chotanagpur Regional Transport Authority had no jurisdic-
tion to grant permit in favour of the appellant. 
The appellant pre-
ferred an appeal to t!ie Minister. 
The Minister lipheM the view of 
the Appeal Board and dismissed the appeal. 
TI1e appellant in an application under Articles· Z26 and 227 of the 
Constitution asked for a writ of certiorari to quash the orders of the 
Appeal Board of the State Transport Authority, Patna and of the 
Minister of Transport, Government of Bihar, Patna. 
The question which was raised before the High Court was whether
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.