Alteration In Vehicle For Persons With Disability Exempted From Payment Of Tax, Vehicle Need Not Be Driven By Such Person: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently noted that under the above GO, the only condition was that the vehicle should be adapted for the "use" of the physically handicapped person. Thus, it was not a condition that the vehicle must be driven by such person.

Justice PT Asha of the Madurai bench looked at the meaning of adapted vehicle under the Tamil Nadu Motor Vehicles Act and Rules regarding alteration of motor vehicles. The court found that the law does not specify that the person should ride the vehicle.

Neither the definition under Section 2(1) nor Section 52 specifies that it is the person, for whose purpose, the adaption is made, who should ride the vehicle. On the contrary, the definition of adapted vehicle makes it clear that the vehicle should be used solely by or “for such person”.

The court added that when a rule or regulation granted certain rights to particular sections of the society, such rule or regulation must be given a purposive interpretation to ensure that its benefits reaches the intended section. Thus, the State should ensure that such persons who are granted exemption enjoy the same.

Where a rule or regulation purports to grand a right to a particular section of society, Courts must use the rule of purposive interpretation to ensure that the object of beneficial legislation reaches the intended section of the society. The Government Order read along with Section 2(1) and Section 52 of the Act clearly spells out that a physically challenged person, who owns a vehicle and has adapted the vehicle for his use is entitled to the tax exemption.

In the present case, Angappan claiming to have 80% locomotor disability had approached the court after the Regional Transport Officer, Pudukottai had rejected his application for tax exemption. The officers had demanded production of the disability certificate and a certificate stating that the Angappan can drive the vehicle. They also sought for a certificate from the Retro Fitment Centre, which had adapted the vehicle. Though the certificates were produced, his application was rejected.

The authorities however countered this claim by submitting that the tax exemption was available only for self driven vehicles.

The court noted that the authorities had in fact misconstrued the provisions of the Government Order. The stand that tax exemption was available only for self driven vehicles was a misconception.

Further, the court noted that in the present case, there were no major alterations as contemplated in the Act. The only alteration was for the easy ingress and egress of Angappan. Thus, the court held that Angappan was eligible for tax exemption and directed the authorities to grant the same.

Case Title: Angappan v Secretary to the State of Tamil Nadu and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 107