JUDGMENT
Ashok Bhushan, J.
1. Heard Shri A.D. Saunders, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Devendra Kumar appearing for respondent No. 3.
2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 27.5.2006 passed by Registering Authority cancelling the transfer of Registration granted in favour of the petitioner of Vehicle No. UP-78/AD-1006. The petitioner filed an appeal against the said order which appeal has also been dismissed by the appellate authority vide its order dated 7.12.2006 which has been also been prayed to be quashed.
3. Brief facts for deciding the writ petition are; the vehicle No. U.P. 78/AD-1006 was registered in the name of one San) ay Kumar Gupta who died on 3.8.2004. After death of Sanjay Kumar Gupta the petitioner filed an application in form 29 and form 30 on 19.8.2004 alongwith an affidavit dated 3.8.2004 praying that the vehicle be transferred in favour of the petitioner. On the basis of said application the vehicle was transferred in favour of the petitioner. An application was filed by Smt. Shobha Gupta, w/o Late Sanjay Kumar Gupta stating that by playing fraud the vehicle has been got transferred by the petitioner in his name by putting up some imposter. Death certificate and the succession certificate was filed by Smt. Sobha Gupta alongwith the application. Registering authority issued notices to the petitioner after receiving the said complaint and after hearing both the parties, passed the order dated 27.5.2006 cancelling the transfer of registration granted earlier in favour of the petitioner. The Registering Authority observed that Shri Sanjay Kumar Gupta had already died on 18.5.2004 and the application in form Nos. 30 and 29 were submitted containing signature of Sanjay Kumar Gupta which is nothing but fraud played by the petitioner. Against the said order dated 27.5.2006 appeal was filed which too has been dismissed by the appellate authority confirming the finding of Registering Authority.
4. Shri A.D. Saunders, learned Counsel for the petitioner challenging the order contended that signatures were made by Sanjay Kumar Gupta before his death in form Nos. 29 and 30 which were presented on 19.8.2004 subsequent to death, hence there was no error in the order of Registering Authority transferring the registration in favour of the petitioner. He submits that under Section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, there is no prohibition of presenting an application signed by a person who has died earlier.
5. I have considered the submissions and perused the record.
6. Section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides for transfer of ownership. Sub-section (1) and Sub-section (2) of the said Section 50 which is relevant for the present case is quoted below:
50. Transfer of ownership.
(1) Where the ownership of any motor vehicle registered under this Chapter is transferred:
(a) the transferor shall:
(i) in the case of a vehicle registered within the same State, within fourteen days of the transfer, report the fact of transfer, in such form with such documents and in such manner, as may be prescribed by the Central Government to the registering authority within whose jurisdiction the transfer is to be effected and shall simultaneously send a copy of the said report to the transferee ; and
(ii) in the case of a vehicle registered outside the State, within forty-five days of the transfer, forward to the registering authority referred to in Sub-clause (i):
(A) the no objection certificate obtained under Section 48 ; or
(B) in a case where no such certificate has been obtained:
(I) the receipt obtained under Sub-section (2) of Section 48; or
(II) the postal acknowledgement received by the transferor if he has sent an application in this behalf by registered post acknowledgement due to the registering authority referred to in Section 48,
together with a declaration that he has not received any communication from such authority refusing to grant such certificate or requiring him to comply within any direction subject to which such certificate may be granted ;
(b) the transferee shall, within thirty days of the transfer, report the transfer to the registering authority within whose jurisdiction he has the residence or place of business where the vehicle is normally kept, as the case may be, and shall forward the certificate of registration to that registering authority together with the prescribed fee and a copy of the report received by him from the transferor in order that particulars of the transfer of ownership may be entered in the certificate of registration.
(2) Where:
(a) the person in whose name a motor vehicle stands registered dies, or
(b) a motor vehicle has been purchased or acquired at a public auction conducted by, or on behalf of, Government,
the person succeeding to the possession of the vehicle or, as the case may be, who has purchased or acquired the motor vehicle, shall make an application for the purpose of transferring the ownership of the vehicle in his name, to the registering authority in whose jurisdiction he has the residence or place of business where the vehicle is normally kept, as the case may be, in such manner, accompanied with such fee, and within such period as may be prescribed by the Central Government.
7. The rules have been framed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 namely Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. Rule 55 and Rule 56 has been framed providing the procedure for transfer of ownership as contained in Section 50 of the Act. Rule 55 and Rule 56 are quoted as below:
55. Transfer of ownership.–(1) Where the ownership of a motor vehicle is transferred, the transferor shall report the fact of transfer in Form 29 to the registering authorities concerned in whose Jurisdiction the transferor and the transferee reside or have their places of business.
(2) An application for the transfer of ownership of a motor vehicle under Sub-clause (i) of Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 50 shall be made by the transferee in Form 30 and shall be accompanied by:
(i) the certificate of registration ;
(ii) the certificate of insurance; and
(iii) the appropriate fee as specified in Rule 81.
(3) An application for transfer of ownership of a motor vehicle under Sub-clause (ii) of Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 50 shall be made by the transferee in Form 30 and shall, in addition to the documents and fee referred to in Sub-rule (2), be accompanied by one of the following documents, namely:
(a) a no objection certificate granted by the registering authority under Sub-section (3) of Section 48 ; or
(b) an order of the registering authority refusing to grant the no objection certificate under Sub-section (3) of Section 48 ; or
(c) where the no objection certificate or the order, as the case may be, has not been received, a declaration by the transferor that he has not received any such communication together with:
(i) the receipt obtained from the registering authority under Sub-section (2) of Section 48 ; or
(ii) the postal acknowledgement received from the registering authority where the application for no objection certificate has been sent by post.
56. Transfer of ownership on death of owner of the vehicle.–(1) Where the owner of a motor vehicle dies, the person succeeding to the possession of the vehicle may for a period of three months, use the vehicle as if it has been transferred to him where such person has, within thirty days of the death of the owner informs the registering authority of the occurrence of the death of the owner and of his own intention to use the vehicle.
(2) The person referred to in Sub-rule (1) shall apply in Form 31 within the period of three months to the said registering authority for the transfer of ownership of the vehicle in his name, accompanied by:
(a) the appropriate fee as specified in Rule 81 ;
(b) the death certificate in relation to the registered owner ;
(c) the certificate of registration ; and
(d) the certificate of insurance.
8. Section 50(1) provides that where the ownership of any motor vehicle registered is transferred, the transferor shall within fourteen days of the transfer report the fact of transfer.
9. Section 50(1)(b) provides that transferee shall, within thirty days of the transfer, report the transfer to the registering authority. Rule 55 as quoted above provides procedure for transfer of ownership under Sub-section (1). Rule 55 provides that the report by the transferor shall be in Form 29 where as Rule 55(3) provides that application for transfer of ownership by the transferee shall be in Form 30. It is relevant to note that Rule 56 is with regard to transfer of ownership on death of the owner of the vehicle which is to be in Form 31.
10. The Information under Rule 50(1) has to be by the transferor who is alive. In case the transferor is dead the Rule 50 (1) does not contemplate any information by transferor. There is no substance in the submission of the counsel for the petitioner that since transferor has earlier signed the form it could be presented in Form 29 under Sub-section 50(1)(a). The word ‘transferor’ as used in Section 50(2)(a) refers to a transferor who is alive. The case of death of a owner is specifically dealt in Sub-section (2) of Section 50 read with Rule 56, where owner is dead the information report has to be in Form 31 as per Rule 56 of the Rules. The transfer in case of death of owner having specifically provided in Sub-section (2) of Section 50, the case of death has to be read as having been excluded from purview of Section 50(1) of the Act.
11. From the findings recorded by both the authorities below, it is clear that the information was submitted by petitioner in Form 29 and Form 30. Admittedly, those reports were presented before the registering authority on 19.8.2004 where as the owner died on 18.5.2004. When the owner was dead the report had to be in Form 31 as per Section 50(2) read with Rule 56.
12. Both the authorities have recorded categorical findings that petitioner has got registration transferred in his favour by playing fraud on the registering authority. The said finding has been arrived at after considering the entire materials and after hearing both the parties including the petitioner. In view of the facts that Sanjay Kumar Gupta, owner was admittedly dead on the date when report was submitted for transfer of the vehicle, the entire exercise was against the provisions of Act and Rules and has rightly been recalled by the registering authority. No grounds have been made out to interfere with the impugned orders.
13. The writ petition lacks merit and is dismissed.