IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.6127 of 2009 Date of decision: April 23, 2009. Shri Sheo Ram ...Petitioner(s) v. S.D.O. (Civil), Kurukshetra & Anr. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Bhag Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): The petitioner seeks quashing of the letter dated 6.4.2009 (Annexure P-6) whereby the Registering Authority under the Motor Vehicles Act at Kurukshetra has declined to effect transfer of ownership of Tractor bearing registration No.HR-07F-3690. Briefly stated, the facts are that the above mentioned tractor was previously owned by one Raj Kumar from whom it was said to have been purchased by respondent No.2. Thereafter, respondent No.2 allegedly agreed to sell the said tractor to the petitioner and the sale consideration of Rs.3,45,000/- is stated to have been paid to him, the receipt of which has also been duly acknowledged. Respondent No.2 had also signed all the requisite documents for transfer of the ownership of the tractor in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner applied to the Registering Authority for the transfer of the tractor in his name by appending those documents. However, even before the petitioner applied on 23.3.2009, respondent No.2 moved an application dated 14.11.2008 informing the Registering Authority that he continues to be owner of the tractor and his signatures have been obtained on blank papers by misrepresentation. At this juncture, it may be appropriate to mention that the petitioner and respondent No.2 are father and son respectively. There are two more sons of the petitioner who are statedly supporting the petitioner. It appears that there is a family dispute over the ownership of the tractor. The question as to whether or not the sale consideration has passed on to respondent No.2 and/or he had acknowledged the receipt thereof and signed the requisite forms for transfer of ownership of the tractor or his signatures were obtained on blank papers, are disputed questions of fact which cannot be effectively settled by a writ court. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed, however, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum, including the civil court. April 23, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge