Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > The Indian Car Scene


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 8th February 2018, 13:41   #46
BHPian
 
redeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 302
Thanked: 40 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

As much as I see how this Judgement seems to have worried the members, it should be noticed that the Supreme Court has not laid down any new law. This is the law as it is and the Supreme Court has only confirmed what the statute says. I think in todays world of activism and over reach, the Supreme Court has done a great job.

The interest of someone who has suffered in an accident is much higher that the person who has neglected in his responsibility to change the registration because it is inconvenient.


As much as I know that this post can come back to bite me if I am on the wrong side of the law, I don't see any fault with the Judgement. Fault with the legislation? Sure. I agree.
redeff is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 8th February 2018, 14:37   #47
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 13
Thanked: 10 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

Need to tell an (sketchy) incident to understand the seriousness of not transferring RCbook to the new owner. During late 80's my uncle had sold his car to someone. One fine day police came looking for the owner of the car, reason being this car was involved in accident or smuggling (maybe sandalwood). Later this got resolved somehow which I don't remember.
So be aware of the rules and transfer the name before the vehicle gets involved in any nefarious activity.
veerubhai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th February 2018, 14:54   #48
BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: MUMBAI
Posts: 32
Thanked: 42 Times
Default

Terribly illogical judgement, there should be some way to trigger off a review of such a meaningless judgement that doesn't take ground realities into account.

Anyone here has experience with respect to procedure to submit Form 29 to the RTO (one each to original RTO and the new registering RTO, in case of transfer from one RTO to the other).

Here's a copy of form 29 attached; it says on the bottom: "(To be sent by Registered Post Acknowledgment Due)"

If we follow this process, would it indemnify & isolate us from such risk ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by redeff View Post
This is the law as it is and the Supreme Court has only confirmed what the statute says. I think in todays world of activism and over reach, the Supreme Court has done a great job.

The interest of someone who has suffered in an accident is much higher that the person who has neglected in his responsibility to change the registration because it is inconvenient.

Fault with the legislation? Sure. I agree.
I differ on the "done a great job" bit, since that's blind application of text without factoring in the realities. IMHO a great job would have been to recognize that the first seller in the chain was being unnecessarily implicated in an accident caused by some jerk who was breaking the law by not having the vehicle registered in his own name.

No doubt the interest of person who suffered in the accident needs to be taken care of, but certainly not by making the first seller a scapegoat ?

Moderator's Note: Do not make so many back to back posts. Use the Multiquote option () to respond to multiple people.

All the back to back posts have been merged.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf form29.pdf (27.6 KB, 35 views)

Last edited by Zappo : 9th February 2018 at 12:23.
//HB is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 8th February 2018, 15:18   #49
BHPian
 
redeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 302
Thanked: 40 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

I still would suggest that the actual judgement is read first before we all express outrage. In any case, if we do comply with the law, there should be no problem.
redeff is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 8th February 2018, 15:28   #50
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 16
Thanked: 8 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

Being a lawyer and a car enthusiast too, I feel obligated to answer this.
Like many laws in our country, the Motor Vehicles Act is stuck in a time warp and needs changes. There are many grey areas which can and are exploited by nefarious elements.
This grey area led to the great Indian "jugaad". It was common practice for police departments to catch the previous owner (technically still the legal owner) of a vehicle involved in an accident / criminal act but let him go if he manages to sufficiently prove that he had legally sold his car. By doing this, the police doesn't exactly follow the law book, it's more realistic and pragmatic with the objective of catching the actual wrongdoer.
I'm afraid that all this changes in lights of the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. I doubt if any police force will be willing to follow a pragmatic approach in solving such cases. Instead, they are expected to follow the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgement and book the legal owner.
What is really needed here is a new law enacted which makes it super easy for someone to legally sell his vehicle and ensure that the ownership is transferred on the RC without running from pillar to post. Unfortunately, this will not be easy as Transport is a state subject. A uniform rule for this throughout the country is difficult and will take a lot of effort.

Meanwhile, my only advice to those selling their vehicles is to be adamant on ownership transfer on the RC; and make it a mandatory condition for selling your vehicle.
utkarsh10 is offline   (5) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 8th February 2018, 15:58   #51
BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: MUMBAI
Posts: 32
Thanked: 42 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

Quote:
Originally Posted by redeff View Post
I still would suggest that the actual judgement is read first before we all express outrage. In any case, if we do comply with the law, there should be no problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by utkarsh10 View Post
Meanwhile, my only advice to those selling their vehicles is to be adamant on ownership transfer on the RC; and make it a mandatory condition for selling your vehicle.
Yes indeed I did read it, and it's not just misplaced outrage. Consider my situation where i recently sold my car (to an individual who intends to keep it for his personal use) and he wanted to have the transfer work done by his agent and not from my agent. Prima facie I'm convinced the buyer is genuine and hence I do not have much doubt that he will not get it transferred to his name, but still this kind of judgement may leave me exposed to unnecessary risk in the meanwhile ?

And on this flip side, having also purchased another pre-owned car (in lieu of the one just sold), I have a first-hand experience that 2 months have passed since the transfer process was initiated, and yet the RC transferred to my name is not received.

So what are we supposed to do - stop buying and selling pre-owned cars ? Or go ahead and buy / sell but sit for months on end without using the car, till the bureaucracy takes it's own sweet time to do it's job ?
//HB is offline   (3) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 8th February 2018, 20:57   #52
BHPian
 
adneeraj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Pune
Posts: 89
Thanked: 110 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

This is an absurd ruling.
The process of transfer should be fixed before passing such a ruling.
There are many scenarios to be considered - almost all of those mentioned here.

- I sell my vehicle to an individual - he insists to transfer it via his own means - so I just sign off on the transfer papers and hope that while this guy uses the vehicle (still in my name) he does not do anything stupid with it.
- I exchange my vehicle at a dealership and hope that the dealer does all things properly, legally before handing over the keys to the new owner.

I had sold my bike about 3-4 years ago and very much remember that I had to pester this guy to complete the transfer formalities for about 6 months. The bike showed my name of ownership until a good 5-6 months even after I had handed over the keys to him.
I did have the delivery note and an affidavit signed by the new owner that absolved me of all responsibilities arising from that bike. But I doubt if something like that holds any value against this new ruling.

This ruling is totally irrelevant. It actually feels like the judge ruling this has no idea of what it really takes to sell/buy a used car - these folks obviously have their cars provided by the government...
adneeraj is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2018, 00:33   #53
BHPian
 
naikameya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 108
Thanked: 103 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

While the law is correct, I feel the judgment is little too idealistic and stupid. As many have pointed out when the car is sold to a dealer for exchange or otherwise it does not get transferred or registered to anybody till they find a buyer.

I think I will go and get my cars back from the dealer, since if I am liable then I am the owner. Will supreme court help me get my cars back?

I always felt this and hence have repeatedly checked on SMS if my car is registered on a new name through the SMS service. In Maharashtra, you can send vahan<space><car number> to 07738299899 and know the owner.

Another thing one can do is not cancel the insurance. But not sure about this, can some expert comment on this?
naikameya is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2018, 11:49   #54
Newbie
 
rayn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 1
Thanked: 5 Times
Default Re: Old car sold, new owner refusing to transfer ownership

Quote:
Originally Posted by speedmiester View Post
Agree, the court should have put the responsibility on the buyer to have the car registered in their name instead of blaming the original owner.
Even if we have all proofs that the car has been sold, still this will become a huge liability on part of the original owner.
Supreme Court observed that there can be transfer of title by payment of consideration and delivery of the car. But for the purposes of the Act, the person whose name is reflected in the records of the registering authority is the owner. The owner within the meaning of Section 2(30) is liable to compensate. The mandate of the law must be fulfilled.
To go by the Act, there is no other way except that the Seller should go to the Buyer”s RTO (Even if it is in other state) with all the papers and see that the transfer is done, no matter even if he has to spend some days there till the process is over.

Last edited by benbsb29 : 9th February 2018 at 11:54. Reason: Font tags removed.
rayn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2018, 12:37   #55
BHPian
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 397
Thanked: 310 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

I tend to disagree with the law, when it says that the registered owner is responsible for anyone driving his car. If it is a minor family member, yes the parents are responsible, but if a license holder is driving any car, he should be held responsible for his deeds. While issuing a driving license, he should be made aware that he is responsible for his deeds. If he abandons someone elses car and is untraceable, it is a different issue all together.

Secondly, if the law is such, to make the owner responsible, the transfer process can be split into two stages. First when sold, the registration should be immediately cancelable ( maybe an online system),the number plated removed and the car handed over to the broker or new buyer. During this period, the car should be made defunct/not legally pliable, till the time new buyer re-registers it.
This should solve a lot of problems.

Last edited by riteshritesh : 9th February 2018 at 12:38.
riteshritesh is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2018, 13:03   #56
BHPian
 
King_pin09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 321
Thanked: 405 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

Well, to me, this ruling does not come as a surprise. Given that our constitution itself recognizes the principles of “Vicarious Liability” a concept where one individual is held responsible for the acts committed by another. This principle is very much in vogue and is used liberally in dealing with various cases within our country.
Although such principles cannot be considered as logical by any stretch of imagination, however this comes as a great aid to the administrative system, where an entirely unconnected entity can be held responsible for the acts that it has not actually done. This ensures that administration can mint out money in the name of implementing justice / law by overcoming its own inability in dealing with the issue. The liabilities can easily be passed on to an entity and money can be minted to the state coffers (or official’s pockets?) notwithstanding whether a logical justice is rendered or not.

In the present case, the Supreme Court clearly identifies that the seller has not committed any crime of any sort or is at fault in any way. But still it considers him responsible for consequences of a buyer,
a) who has not transferred the owner ship to his name, and
b) who has in fact committed a crime.
Here the court has failed to acknowledge that getting the buyer register the vehicle to his name is completely beyond the control of the seller. For Eg a seller who exchanges his old car to a dealer ship for a new one, such as True Value, is completely unaware of the name and dress of the next buyer and even the date of such sale. In such case it is insane expecting him to locate the new buyer and star chasing him / her for transfer. In fact, it is the administration that has to compel the buyer to get the vehicle transferred to his own name failing which he/ she shall not be permitted to drive such vehicle.
Clearly the administration intends to wash its hands off the responsibility to implement fool proof systems in first place. In as much as the administration would be unwilling to even bring amendments, since such insane practices ensures guaranteed revenues (arising out of its own mistakes) without having to take any pain / effort of chasing the real culprit. Such rulings only help real culprit escape easily from legal proceedings and thus encourage him/ her (and others) to commit further crime.
King_pin09 is offline   (3) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2018, 14:45   #57
BHPian
 
Tassem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 471
Thanked: 439 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

I recently sold my car. I made sure that apart from taking the buyer's signature, I also took his fingerprint on all documents - Transfer, Sale and Delivery note. I also took self attested (again, fingerprinted) ID documents including license and address proof. Took a video of him driving away in the car.

In my mind, legally, the fingerprint would hold more than a signature, which can easily be faked. All of our conversations are printed and saved as well. As a seller, I don't think there's anything more I can do.

When I checked with the RTO (Kerala, EKM), they confirmed that once I apply for and receive an NOC, which I did, I'm all good and the rest of the responsibility lies with the buyer. This seems logical enough.

Not sure how the new ruling affects all this. Have stopped looking for logic in all things government. It's futile. Somehow in their mind, every citizen has infinite free time to spend on following buyers around the country to get them to register cars and what not.
Tassem is offline   (1) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2018, 15:24   #58
BHPian
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York
Posts: 84
Thanked: 117 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

While most of us agree that this ruling by the honourable Supreme Court might not be in the best interests of the Seller, I am not sure if this is just a statement or actually a law passed by the honourable SC.
The reason being, during the last year Ganesh Chaturthi, the honourable High Court in Hyderabad had passed a statement requesting not to install huge Ganesh idols since that causes a lot of inconveniences when going for the immersions. At that time, one of the organizers had made a press statement that the High Court has only requested them and has not passed an order. As a result, the said statement was not considered and there were quite a few large idols which were constructed.

Based on what I read and understood, this was a judgement which was passed on a particular case involving more than 1 sale. Does anyone actually know what was the basis for this judgement? Can some of the lawyers here throw some light on what could have caused this judgement and more importantly, if this is a law, what needs to be done to represent this (petition, notice etc.) to have it changed?
What can we, as a huge forum of auto enthusiasts, do to get this changed? It is very easy to just sit and blame the decision or judgement. Can we do something about it?
get2bid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2018, 18:11   #59
BHPian
 
SR-71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bangalore
Posts: 223
Thanked: 107 Times
Default Re: Supreme Court: Change records after car sale or pay for mishaps

Quote:
Originally Posted by get2bid View Post
While most of us agree that this ruling by the honourable Supreme Court might not be in the best interests of the Seller, I am not sure if this is just a statement or actually a law passed by the honourable SC.
The courts do not have the power to pass a law, thats the job of the executive & legislature. The job of the judiciary is to adjudicate disputes based on prevailing law of the land. However, once SC passes an judgement, it rarely gets reviewed and is typically used as reference in subsequent cases. With this ruling, the chances of subsequent cases filed on the premise of 'I failed to transfer the papers but have all proof of sale' have very slim chance of getting a favorable response (of course it depends on the nature of the case too).

Quote:
Originally Posted by get2bid View Post
What can we, as a huge forum of auto enthusiasts, do to get this changed? It is very easy to just sit and blame the decision or judgement. Can we do something about it?
One needs to influence the law makers, infact one of the forum members has been fighting for 'one nation one tax' which holds merit. But again in this case there is nothing wrong with the law per say. It is the responsibility of the owner to ensure the ownership is transferred if he/she is directly dealing with the customer. If an intermediate is involved, you always have the recourse of suing the intermediate for dereliction of service but good luck with that.

Last edited by SR-71 : 9th February 2018 at 18:20.
SR-71 is offline   (2) Thanks Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2018, 18:16   #60
BHPian
 
Turbopetrol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: BLR
Posts: 122
Thanked: 97 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SR-71 View Post
With this ruling, the chances of subsequent cases filed on the premise of 'I failed to transfer the papers but have all proof of sale' have very slim chance of getting a favorable response (of course it depends on the nature of the case too).
As I understand, even during this particular case hearing various similar case and judgment references were brought before the court by the lawyers. Hence this judgment is specific to this case and could be a reference to other cases that are factually and evidence wise similar.
Turbopetrol is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Can speed cameras reduce road mishaps? ad3952n Street Experiences 22 8th September 2014 14:23
Protest against Tata Motors.EDIT Supreme Court Orders Tata to repair Sumo (pg.40) v1p3r The Indian Car Scene 713 19th January 2013 18:31
Car tints banned by HC! EDIT: Supreme Court bans all kinds of sunfilms in cars kpzen The Indian Car Scene 2687 14th June 2012 16:26
Supreme Court says bandhs are fine ! maverick030581 Shifting gears 21 5th February 2009 01:48


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 10:13.

Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks