SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 26802

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Murali Purushothaman, J
K. Srikumar – Appellant
Versus
Regional Transport Officer, Regional Transport Office, Kakkanaad, Ernakulam – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 13520 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.AMMU CHARLES, SRI.K.MANOJ CHANDRAN, SHRI.P.R.AJITH KUMAR
For the Respondents: GP SMT.DEVISHREE, Adv.Arundhathi.R.

Seller who complied with transfer formalities can seek registration suspension if transferee fails to update ownership.

Headnote:First Paragraph: Relevant provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 govern vehicle ownership transfer and registration cancellation. The registered owner sold the vehicle in 2011, issued NOC to the transferee's authority, but ownership remains unchanged after 14 years despite gift to legal heir. Court directs consideration of representation for registration suspension pending transfer. Second Paragraph: Issue framed as failure of transferee to update records despite seller's compliance. Ratio: Seller complied with transfer formalities; authority must consider request for suspension until ownership updated (para 4). Third Paragraph: Writ petition disposed directing 1st respondent to consider Ext.P4 within one month.

Table of Content
1. seller transferred vehicle, issued noc, seeks registration cancellation due to transferee inaction. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments heard from petitioner, government pleader, and respondent counsel. (Para 3)
3. direct consideration of representation and allow registration suspension request. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the registered owner of a vehicle 'Skoda Laura' bearing No.KL-07-BF-45, which is registered with the 1st respondent. The petitioner sold the same to one S.Jegadambal, mother of the 2nd respondent on 21.07.2011 and the possession and the original Registration Certificate were handed over to the purchaser. Thereupon, he intimated the transfer of the vehicle to the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent issued NOC in favour of the registering authority at Theni, Tamil Nadu as can be seen from Ext.P2. 2. The petitioner contends that despite complying with all the formalities in his capacity as a transferer, the transferee failed to transfer the ownership of the vehicle in the records of the Motor Vehicles Department and the ownership of the vehicle still stands in the name of the petitioner despite the lapse of 14 years. The petitioner further states that the vehicle has been gifted by the said Jegadambal to the 2nd respondent as per Ext.P3 gift deed. The petitioner submitted Ext.P4 representation before the 1st respondent seeking cancellation of the registration of the vehicle till the ownership of the vehicle is changed in the RC book by the purchaser/legal heirs of the purchaser.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and Adv.Arundhathi.R., the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.

4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P4 in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. It will be open to the petitioner to make necessary request before the 1st respondent for suspension of the registration, pending final disposal of Ext.P4.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top