1) issue public notice about sale of bike by you 

2) inform RTO that bike has been sold by you 

3) also file police complaint that bike has been sold by you a year back but buyer has not transferred vehicle on his name and you apprehend it may be used for terrorist activities 

4) you continue to be liable till bike stands in your name 

What the broker did with you is offence  of criminal breach of trust. You gave him bike for legal transfer but he has misappropriated it. File a criminal complaint against him under Section 406, to establish that the bike is no in you possession and for any crime committed with the bike, broker will be liable not you.

You need to inform RTO and local police station about the sale from your side. Also inform the buyer or agent that they should transfer once the sale is done 

- As per the Supreme Court Judgment, if you sold your vehicle and failed to transfer the ownership through legal way, then you will remain the owner of the vehicle, and further you will be responsible for any untoward incident and accident by the buyer. 

- As per the Indian Motor Vehicle, the transferor (seller) has to inform the Regional Transport Offices (RTO) within 14 days of the transfer of ownership. 

- Further , this Act also instructs the transferee (buyer) to inform the RTO about the change in vehicle ownership and produce all the required documents within 30 days of the transfer.

- You should first lodged your complaint with the police station after narrating all the facts and submit all the documents you have in your support.

- Further, also inform the RTO in written, after enclosing the said police complaint receiving copy , and thereby  request the official to change the ownership.

- However, you can also send al legal notice to the said agent for the same 

These cases are very common in various Courts of India and Supreme Court of India. I can understand your concern in this regard. 

Firstly, you need to understand the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in this regard. 

Supreme Court in the case of Naveen Kumar v. Vijay Kumar, (2018) held that: 

Firstly, let us see what is the definition of owner in the Motor Vehicles Act. Section 2(30) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, defines owner (of a vehicle) as under:

“(30) “owner” means a person in whose name a motor vehicle stands registered, and where such person is a minor, the guardian of such minor, and in relation to a motor vehicle which is the subject of a hire-purchase, agreement, or an agreement of lease or an agreement of hypothecation, the person in possession of the vehicle under that agreement;”

Interpreting this clause, the Supreme Court observed that the person in whose name a motor vehicle stands registered is the owner of the vehicle for the purposes of the Act. The use of the expression “means” is a clear indication of the position that it is the registered owner whom Parliament has regarded as the owner of the vehicle.

The Court referred to the earlier Motor Vehicles Act of 1939, wherein the expression “owner” was defined in Section 2(19) as follows:

“(19) “owner” means, where the person in possession of a motor vehicle is a minor, the guardian of such minor, and in relation to a motor vehicle which is the subject of a hire-purchase agreement, the person in possession of the vehicle under that agreement.”

The Supreme Court held that the Parliament while enacting the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 made a specific change by recasting the earlier definition. Section 2(19) of the earlier Act stipulated that where a person in possession of a motor vehicle is a minor, the guardian of the minor would be the owner and where the motor vehicle was subject to a hire-purchase agreement, the person in possession of the vehicle under the agreement would be the owner. The Court observed:

“The 1988 Act has provided in the first part of Section 2(30) that the owner would be the person in whose name the motor vehicle stands registered. Where such a person is a minor the guardian of the minor would be the owner. In relation to a motor vehicle which is the subject of an agreement of hire purchase, lease or hypothecation, the person in possession of the vehicle under that agreement would be the owner. The latter part of the definition is in the nature of an exception which applies where the motor vehicle is the subject of a hire-purchase agreement or of an agreement of lease or hypothecation. Otherwise the definition stipulates that for the purposes of the Act, the person in whose name the motor vehicle stands registered is treated as the owner.”

The Court took note of Section 50 of the Act which deals with transfer of ownership of a vehicle, and also referred to various previous judgments, in particular, the following cases, which were affirmed:

• 
  Pushpa v. Shakuntala, (2011) 2 SCC 240; 
• 
  T.V. Jose v. Chacko P.M., (2001) 8 SCC 748; 
• 
  P.P. Mohammed v. K. Rajappan, (2008) 17 SCC 624.

After considering all these aspects, the Supreme Court held:

“…in view of the definition of the expression “owner” in Section 2(30), it is the person in whose name the motor vehicle stands registered who, for the purposes of the Act, would be treated as the “owner”. However, where a person is a minor, the guardian of the minor would be treated as the owner. Where a motor vehicle is subject to an agreement of hire purchase, lease or hypothecation, the person in possession of the vehicle under that agreement is treated as the owner. In a situation … where the registered owner has purported to transfer the vehicle but continues to be reflected in the records of the Registering Authority as the owner of the vehicle, he would not stand absolved of liability. Parliament has consciously introduced the definition of the expression “owner” in Section 2(30), making a departure from the provisions of Section 2(19) in the earlier 1939 Act. The principle underlying the provisions of Section 2(30) is that the victim of a motor accident or, in the case of a death, the legal heirs of the deceased victim should not be left in a state of uncertainty. A claimant for compensation ought not to be burdened with following a trail of successive transfers, which are not registered with the Registering Authority. To hold otherwise would be to defeat the salutary object and purpose of the Act. Hence, the interpretation to be placed must facilitate the fulfilment of the object of the law.”

Thus, it was clearly held by the Supreme Court that a person continues to be owner of the vehicle, even if he has sold his vehicle to another person, if the transfer of the vehicle is not reflected in the RTO records and if the vehicle continues to be in the name of the original owner despite the sale of vehicle. Accordingly, such original owner would continue to be liable for compensation, if any, to be paid by the owner for any accident, despite he having sold the vehicle.

It is therefore in the interest of those who sell their vehicles, to get the vehicles transferred in the name of the buyer by following the procedure laid down for transfer of vehicles, particularly in Section 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Therefore, as per the facts you mentioned you can report the matter to the nearest police station of your area in West Bengal and also the Regional Transport Office. Also, you can issue the legal notice through Advocate in this regard to the concerned person so as to safeguard yourself. 

You may contact my secretary to connect with me for clarification. 

Gopal Verma

Advocate on Record 

Supreme Court of India 

You can write to RTO informing sale but the issue is that you do not have any proof in support of sale. So you are liable to pay all chalan amount and if bike would be used for illegal purpose then also you may face hard face of law. In absence of evidence, law will not be able to help you. 

Dear Client,

Yes, there are a few things you can do to legally protect yourself from any responsibility that might arise from the unlawful usage of your vehicle which continues to be in your name.

1. 
   File a police complaint against the agent. This will create a paper trail of your complaint and establish that you are not the one responsible for the unlawful usage of the vehicle.
2. 
   Send a legal notice to the agent demanding that he transfer the ownership of the vehicle to you immediately. This will put the agent on notice that you are serious about taking legal action if he does not comply.
3. 
   Contact the RTO and inform them that you are not the current owner of the vehicle and that you have not authorized anyone to use it. This will help to prevent the RTO from issuing any further challans or taking any other action against you.
4. 
   Take out an insurance policy on the vehicle in your name. This will protect you financially in case the vehicle is involved in an accident or other incident while it is still in your name.

If you take these steps, you will be in a much stronger position to defend yourself if you are ever held liable for the unlawful usage of your vehicle.

The time taken by you without taking any action against the broker till date shows that you were not very serious about the sale of property or the accidents or any events that took place in connection with the bike by the new buyer.

You were supposed to inform concerned RTO about the sale of bike immediately after you had taken money from the broker.

Even now you can inform the RTO concerned that you have sold the vehicle to a person one yer ago however it appears that the buyer did not apply for transfer of the vehicle to his name.

You can lodge a complaint agaisnt the broker about this lethargic and illegal activity and give the details of the sale of the vehicle in your complaint including the date of sale.

However this will not absolve your liability towards accident or any other misuse of the vehicle by the buyer until and unless it has been legally transferred to his name from your name

Details required. However, you can lodge police complaint reporting theft etc but that too would be effective from date of complaint only but sustainability of the same too is doubtful. 

You have sold the bike for consideration 

you cannot stop buyer from using the bike 

you can issue legal notice to buyer to transfer vehicle in his name 

- Please read my reply given above for taking legal action against him. 

By informing the RTO and local police station your liability will be minimal as explained above 

You can contact the concerned RTO office by sending a letter to them stating the facts and can inform them to record the sale to so and so person with effect from the actual date he took possession and endorse a copy to the police station also so that in case of any accident or any untoward incident you will not be involved in them.

Dear Client,

• You can de-register the vehicle. This will mean that the vehicle cannot be legally driven on public roads. To de-register the vehicle, you will need to apply to the RTO (Regional Transport Office) in your state. You will need to provide proof of ownership, such as the registration certificate and the insurance policy.
• You can blacklist the vehicle. This will mean that the vehicle cannot be insured. To blacklist the vehicle, you will need to contact your insurance company.
• You can file a police complaint against the person who is using the vehicle without your permission. This will help to deter them from using the vehicle in the future.

1. Lodge a complaint letter to the Mumbai RTO in this regard providing/attaching whatever record you have about your buyer.

2. Send a copy of the said letter to Kolkata RTO, Mumbai Police and Kolkata Police also. 

1. On record, you are still the owner.

2. Send the letter as advised in my earlier post proving the evidence of your google pay statement and other evidences.