As per MV Act, 1988, Section 50(1)(a)(i) & (ii):
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)-
and sub section b
(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.
And Sub-section 3 of the same sections says:
(3) If the transferor or the transferee fails to report to the registering authority the fact of transfer within the period specified in clause (a) or clause (b) of subsection (1), as the case may be, or if the person who is required to make an application under sub-section (2) (hereafter in this section referred to as the other person) fails to make such application within the period prescribed, the registering authority may, having regard to the circumstances of the case, require the transferor or the transferee, or the other person, as the case may be, to pay, in lieu of any action that may be taken against him under section 177 such amount not exceeding one hundred rupees as may be prescribed under subsection (5):
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 168 and 50 – MACT – Transfer of vehicle – Liability – High Court held that the appellant alone was liable to pay the compensation because the name of the appellant continued in the records of RTO. Held: Where ownership of the vehicle stood transferred, person in actual possession of the vehicle as well as the person in whose name the vehicle stood in RTO records would be liable to the third party who was injured in the accident. However, the person in actual possession would also be liable.
P.P. MOHAMMED v/s K. RAJAPPAN AND OTHERS [(2008) 17 SCC 624]
The rules in this regard has been clearly explained in the above paragraphs, now it is you who has to understand the law and initiate appropriate action.
Follow the rules and be safe.