Judgment :- R.Rajendra Babu, J. The petitioner; Smt. A.K.Sarojini purchased a stage carriage bearing No. KA 19/952 registered in Karnataka state from Shri. B.K.Vishwanath, a permanent resident of Karnataka and she filed application for re-registration and transfer of ownership of the vehicle before the respondent the Addl. Registering Authority, Kanhangad along with the no objection certificate obtained from the Registering Authority of Karnataka. The respondent rejected the application by Ext.P4 order alleging violation of Rule 269 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules. Aggrieved by the above order, the petitioner filed this original petition for quashing Ext. P4 order. 2. Question for consideration is whether re-registration of the vehicle can be denied invoking Rule 269 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules when the vehicle had been already registered in another State. The learned counsel for the petitioner; Smt.Sumathi Dandapani submitted that as the vehicle had already been registered before the Registering Authority at Karnataka, the re-registration of the of the vehicle can not be denied by the respondent alleging violation of Rule 269 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules. It was further submitted that in view of Sec.46 of the Motor Vehicle Act, the certificate of registration issued in one state shall be effective through out India. Sec.46 of the Motor Vehicle Act stipulates that the motor vehicles registered in accordance with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act stipulates that the motor vehicles registered in accordance with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act in any State shall be effective through out India. Sec. 47 of the Motor Vehicle Act which deals with the assignment of new registration on removal of the vehicle to another State – says that when a Motor Vehicle registered in one State has been kept in another State, for a period exceeding twelve months, the owner of the vehicle shall, within such period and in such form containing such particulars as may be prescribed by the Central Government, apply to the registering authority, within whose jurisdiction the vehicle then is, for the assignment of a new registration mark and shall present the certificate of registration to that registering authority. Proviso to sec. 47(1) says that the application shall be accompanied by the no objection certificate obtained under Sec. 48. Proviso to sec. 47(1) says that the application shall be accompanied by the no objection certificate obtained under Sec. 48. In the present case, the no objection certificate obtained from the registering authority also had been filed and as such Sec. 47 of the Motor Vehicle Act has been complied with. 3. The main argument advanced by the learned Government Pleader was that the seating capacity of the vehicle as per Rule 269 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules was 50 as the wheel base of the vehicle was 519.5 cm ie within the range of 506 to 550 cm. and hence there should be the required number of seats provided in the vehicle and as the required number of seats were not provided in the vehicle, re-registration cannot be allowed. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Rule 269 would apply only with respect to the fixation of tax on the basis of the seating capacity and it had nothing to do with the actual number of seats provided in the vehicle. A similar question has come up before this court for consideration in A.P. Ramakrishnan v. Regional Transport Officer, Kannur (1992 ILR (2) 740). Wherein this court held: Under sec. 46 of the Motor Vehicle registered in any State shall not be required to be registered elsewhere in India and a certificate of registration issued or in force under the Motor Vehicles Act in respect of such vehicle shall be effective throughout India. Therefore, the vehicle can be regarded as having valid registration as omni bus throughout India. Sec. 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act says that when a motor vehicle registered in one State has been kept in another State for a period exceeding twelve months, the owner of the vehicle shall, within such period and in such form containing such particulars as may be prescribed by the central Government apply to the registering authority, within whose jurisdiction the vehicle then is, for the assignment of a new registration mark and shall present the certificate of registration to the registering authority. The application shall be accompanied by no objection certificate under Sec. 48 of the Act. Under rule 54 of the central Motor Vehicles Rules, an application for assignment of new registration mark, under sub-sec. The application shall be accompanied by no objection certificate under Sec. 48 of the Act. Under rule 54 of the central Motor Vehicles Rules, an application for assignment of new registration mark, under sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 47 shall be made in Form No. 27 and shall be accompanied by a no objection certificate in Form No. 28. Under rule 59, an application for recording a change in the residence in the certificate of registration of a motor vehicle shall be made by the owner of the vehicle in form No. 33. There is no dispute that these rules have been complied with. The contention is that when these rules are complied with and request for assignment of new registration mark is sought for, there is a duty to the respondents to give the same. Since under Sec. 46 registration effected in Tamil Nadu will be valid and effective throughout India, assignment of new registration mark and change of address or transfer of the vehicle can be given even without any modification required under rule 269. I respectfully agree with the above approach and such the registration of the vehicle has to be made in accordance with the central rules. The assignment of re-registration of the vehicle has to be done in accordance with the sec.47 of the Motor Vehicle act. Sec. 47 specifically stipulates that the application has to be made in such form as may be prescribed by the Central Government. The Central Government has framed Rule 54 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, which says that the application for assignment of a new registration mark under sub section (1) of Sec. 47 shall be made in form 27 and shall be accompanied by a no objection certificate in form 28 along with appropriate fee prescribed in rule 81. Thus the Central Government has already prescribed the procedure also for assignment of the new registration mark in the Central Motor Vehicles Rules. When the Central Govt. had prescribed the procedure also in the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, the same procedure has to be adopted. When the procedure as contemplated under Rule 54 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules is complied with vehicle has to be re-registered in accordance with the above rules. In fact Rule 269 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules does not have any role regarding the assignment of registration of the vehicle. When the procedure as contemplated under Rule 54 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules is complied with vehicle has to be re-registered in accordance with the above rules. In fact Rule 269 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules does not have any role regarding the assignment of registration of the vehicle. A Division Bench of this court considered a some what identical matter in R.T.O. Palakkad v. Kuttikrishnan (1993 (1) KLT 636) held: On a careful reading of R. 269 of the Rules, it can be seen that the said rule deals with minimum seating capacity of stage carriage. It has nothing to do with transfer of ownership or assigning new registration mark which are governed by other independent provisions. Vide Sec. 47(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1989 (assigning new registration mark), Sec. 47(4) thereof (registration of vehicles not registered within the State). R.48 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 deals with issue of certified of registration. Thus it is clear that Rule 269 has no application regarding the assignment of re-registration of the vehicle and the rejection of the application for the assignment of registration of the vehicle By Ext. P4 order cannot be sustained. 4. In the present case against the column “seating capacity” in ext. P1 registration certificate it is recorded as “41+10+2”. The above endorsement by the registering authority can not be in respect of the seating capacity of the vehicle but in fact it relates to the actual number of seats provided in the vehicle. It appears to be a mistake committed by the authorities while registering the vehicle. The seating capacity of the vehicle shall be directly proportionate to the wheel base of the vehicle as well as other factors. The above aspect had been considered by the Division Bench of this Court in Joint R.T.O. Alwaye v. Joshi (1996 (1) KLT 196.) "Application for registration has to be submitted in Form 20. It contains a column as item No.19 to state about seating capacity of the vehicle. Certificate has to be issued in Form 20. There is a column in it for showing the seating Capacity (including driver). Necessarily the Registering Authority has to enter the correct particulars in certificate. Seating capacity is apparently different from actual seats provided in a vehicle. It contains a column as item No.19 to state about seating capacity of the vehicle. Certificate has to be issued in Form 20. There is a column in it for showing the seating Capacity (including driver). Necessarily the Registering Authority has to enter the correct particulars in certificate. Seating capacity is apparently different from actual seats provided in a vehicle. This can be illustrated thus; Even if a vehicle has a seating capacity of 20, the owner can provide only one seat in the vehicle. But seating capacity will not thereby dwindle down to one. Capacity for providing seating accommodation in the vehicle is what is meant by seating capacity. It depends upon the design, the horse power, the unladen weight and other allied factors." Infact what is provided in the Registration certificate is not actually the seating capacity but actual seats provided in the vehicle. Rule 269 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules stipulates the number of seating capacity of the vehicle based on the wheel base of the vehicle. Rule 269 (1) reads; "The minimum seating capacity of a stage carriage shall be directly proportionate to the wheel base of the vehicle. In all stage carriages the minimum number of seats to be provided shall be as shown in column (2) of the table below, leaving it to the operator to increase the capacity consistent with other rules relating to seating capacity and with due regard to the type of chassis on which the body is fitted." Rule 269 specifies the minimum seating capacity on the basis of the wheel base. The wheel base as disclosed from Ext. is 519.5cm. The minimum seating capacity as disclosed in rule 269 in respect of the vehicle having wheel base from 506 to 515 c.m. is 50. The proviso to the above rule further says minimum number may be reduced by two seats in the case of stage carriage with separate entrance and exit. The 2nd proviso Further states that the minimum number can be reduced by one fifth in the case of stage carriage operating as City/Town Service. If the vehicle is operated in a city route, Rule 269 prescribing the minimum number of seats need not be insisted though the seating capacity may be more. The 2nd proviso Further states that the minimum number can be reduced by one fifth in the case of stage carriage operating as City/Town Service. If the vehicle is operated in a city route, Rule 269 prescribing the minimum number of seats need not be insisted though the seating capacity may be more. The above proviso also would indicate that Rule 269 does not have any application regarding the registration of the vehicle but it may be made applicable at the time of granting the permit or fixing the tax in respect of the vehicle. On a consideration of all the above circumstances, I do not think that the order refusing re-registration can be justified at any event. Vehicle has to be re-registered in accordance with the Central Motor Vehicles Rules. 5. The original petition is allowed. Ext.P4 order is set aside. The respondent is directed to re-register the vehicle in accordance with the Central Motor Vehicle Rules.