IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO No. 2985 of 2006 DATE OF DECISION: 12.9.2006 Harbhajan Singh and others ...Appellants versus Paramjit Kaur and others ... Respondents CORAM:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uma Nath Singh. Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mahesh Grover. Present: Mr.R.L.Batta, Sr.Advocate, with Ms.Geeta Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. UMA NATH SINGH, J. (ORAL) Admittedly, there is non-compliance of the provisions of Section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, as required on transfer of a vehicle. Hon'ble the Apex Court in a judgment reported in JT 2001(8) SC 179 (Dr.T.V.Jose versus Chacko P.M. Alias Thankachan and others), has declined to interfere in the matter because on the records of the DTO, the transferor continued to be the owner of the vehicle. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the appeal. However, looking at the fact that there is evidence to indicate that the vehicle had been sold and transferred to Rajbir Singh, the appellants would be at liberty to invoke alternative remedy, if any. At this stage, learned senior counsel prayed for and permitted to withdraw FAO No.2985 of 2006. Hence, dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as aforesaid. ( UMA NATH SINGH ) JUDGE September 12, 2006 ( MAHESH GROVER ) pk JUDGE