Judgment :- V. RAMASWAMI, J. 1. The respondent is a firm carrying on business as Hire Purchase in Financiers at Madras One Luka who was operating a vehicle KLK 7717 under a permit issued by the Regional Transport authorities in the State of Kerala entered into a hire purchase agreement with the respondent on 25th September, 1967 in respect of the said vehicle under which the said Luka borrowed a sum of Rs. 50,400, agreeing to repay the same in 23 monthly instalments commencing from 25th November, 1967. The whole transaction took the shape of a hire purchase transaction and this hire purchase transaction has been duly endorsed in the registration certificate of the vehicle as required under the Motor Vehicles Act. The first appellant, Tahsildar, South West, issued a notice on 28th January, 1974 to the respondent stating that the Collector of Kottayam had informed the Tahsildar that a sum of Rs. 21,393.64 was due from the respondent towards alleged arrears of vehicle tax and tax on passengers and goods for the period from April, 1968 to 31st March, 1973. This was stated to be in respect of Stage Carriage KLK 7717. The appellants demanded the tax from the respondent. Thereupon, the respondent filed W.P. No. 209 of 1974, praying for the issue of a writ of prohibition directing the appellants not to proceed with the recovery of the money from him. 2. Under Sec. 3(3), of the Kerala Motor Vehicles (Taxation of Passengers and Goods) Act, 1963, the operator shall be liable to pay the tax levied under sub-Sec. (1) on all passengers, luggages or goods carried by stage carriages and on all goods carried by goods vehicles of which he is the operator, to the Government in the manner provided in this Act. The word ‘operator’ is defined in Sec. 2(b) as meaning the owner or the person having possession or control of the vehicle and including any person whose name is entered in the permit as holder thereof. The permit itself is defined as meaning a permit granted or counter-signed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (Central Act 4 of 1939), authorising the use of a vehicle as a stage carriage or as a public carrier vehicle in any part of the State. The permit itself is defined as meaning a permit granted or counter-signed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (Central Act 4 of 1939), authorising the use of a vehicle as a stage carriage or as a public carrier vehicle in any part of the State. The Motor Vehicles Act defines an owner of a motor vehicle as meaning ‘where the person in possession of a motor vehicle is a minor, the guardian of such minor and in relation to a vehicle which is subject to a hire purchase agreement the person in possession of the vehicle under that agreement.” By a combined reading of these two definitions, it may be seen that the person who is liable to pay the tax in the case of a vehicle which is under a hire purchase agreement, is the person in possession of the vehicle under that agreement. In the present case that person is Luka. It is well-settled that a hire purchase agreement holder, though a ownet under the common law, is not the owner for the purpose of the Motor Vehicles Act and the rules framed thereunder. In these circumstances, therefore, the liability to pay the motor vehicles tax could not be fastened on the hire purchase financier and only the person who is operating the vehicle would be liable to pay the tax. Rightly therefore, the learned Judge has allowed the writ petition. The writ appeal fails, and is therefore, dismissed; but there will be no order as to costs.