Jagat Narayan, J.—This is an application under Art. 226 of the Constitution by one Shri Ratan against an order of the Regional Transport Authority dated 6.12.56. 2. The facts which have given rise to this application are these. Shri Ratan petitioner was the owner of motor bus No. RJF 323 which was registered in his name on 14.5.55. He transferred this bus in favour of Loon Singh non-petitioner by means of a written document. On 1.5.56 Loon Singh filed an application to the Registering Authority, Bikaner, under sec. 31 of the Motor Vehicles Act (herein-after called the Act) for recording the transfer of ownership. This application was made more than 30 days after the transfer. The petitioner appeared before the Registering Authority and objected to the recording of the transfer on two grounds. His first ground was that the transfer was void as it was obtained by fraudulent misrepresentation. The Registering Authority overruled this objection holding that it had no power to investigate into dispute of this nature and that if transferee reports the transfer within 30 days the Registering Authority has no alternative but to record the transfer on the registration certificate. The second objection of the petitioner was that the application was made beyond 30 days. This objection was upheld by the Registering Authority. It was of the opinion that sec. 31 prescribed a period of limitation for making an application and he had no power to condone the delay in making it as sec. 5 of the Limitation Act had not been made applicable to the Act. In the result he dismissed the application of Loon Singh non-petitioner. 3. Against the above order the non-petitioner filed an appeal to the Regional Transport Authority. The petitioner contested the appeal. A preliminary objection was taken that no appeal lay against an order passed under sec. 31. This was overruled by the following reasoning— "Certificate of Registration" has been defined in the Act to mean the certificate issued by a competent authority to the effect that a motor vehicle has been duly registered in accordance with the provisions of Chapter III of the Act. Chapter III deals with the registration of motor vehicles and consists of secs. 22 to 41. Sec. 22 deals with the necessity of registration. Sec. 23 defines the place where the registration should be made. Sec. 24 lays down the method of registration. Chapter III deals with the registration of motor vehicles and consists of secs. 22 to 41. Sec. 22 deals with the necessity of registration. Sec. 23 defines the place where the registration should be made. Sec. 24 lays down the method of registration. Sec. 25 deals with temporary registration. Sec. 26 deals with the production of vehicles at the time of registration. Sec. 27 prescribes the conditions under which the registration may be refused. Sec. 28 shows how the registration shall be effective. Sec. 29 gives the method of assignment of fresh registration marks, sec.30 deals with recording of the change of residence or place of business of the owner in the registration certificate and sec. 31 deals with the recording of the transfer of ownership. Sec. 31(1) reads as follows;— Within thirty days of the transfer of ownership of any motor vehicle registered under this Chapter, the transferee shall report the transfer to the registering authority within whose jurisdiction he resides and shall forward the certificate of registration to that registering authority together with the prescribed fee in order that particulars of the transfer of ownership may be entered therein. A perusal of sec. 22(1) clearly shows that the owner of a vehicle is not allowed to cause or permit the vehicle to be) driven in any public place unless the vehicle is duly registered in accordance with Chapter III. In other words the responsibility for satisfying this requirement of Chapter III before the vehicle is allowed to be driven in a public place rests with the owner. See. 31 of the Act binds the transferee owner to report the fact of transfer within 30 days to the Registering Authority and to submit the certificate of registration to him in order that the particulars of the transfer of ownership may be entered therein. This clearly shows that registration of a vehicle includes the recording of the transfer of ownership thereof by the Registering Authority. The penalty for failing to comply with these provisions is provided in Chapter IV of the Act. Sec. 112 of this Chapter lays down that whoever contravenes any provision of the Act or of any rule made thereunder shall, if no other penalty is provided for the offence, be punishable with fine which may extend to twenty rupees etc.................. The penalty for failing to comply with these provisions is provided in Chapter IV of the Act. Sec. 112 of this Chapter lays down that whoever contravenes any provision of the Act or of any rule made thereunder shall, if no other penalty is provided for the offence, be punishable with fine which may extend to twenty rupees etc.................. Sec, 24 (2) makes it obligatory on the Registering Authority to register the vehicle and issue a certificate of registration unless there are good reasons to refuse the registration under sec. 27 of the Act. Thus in the present case the application for transfer of ownership under sec. 31 which is included in Chapter III of the Act should be construed as an application for registration. 4. It may be mentioned here that an order refusing to register a vehicle passed under sec. 27 is appealable to the R.T.A. under sec. 35 of the Act. The petitioner also contended before the R.T.A. that the order of the Registering Authority rejecting the application on the ground that it was barred by time was correct. This contention was also overruled and the appeal was allowed. The petitioner filed an appeal against the above order to the Appellate Authority of the State Transport Authority which was dismissed as obviously no appeal lay to it. The present writ application was then filed, against the order of the R.T.A. 5. The first contention of the petitioner is that no appeal lay to the R.T.A. against an order of the Registering Authority passed under sec. 31 as sec. 35 which provides for appeals does not specifically mention that an order passed under sec. 31 is appealable, and that if the Legislature had intended that an order passed under sec. 31 refusing to record a transfer on the registration certificate should be appealable, a specific provision would have been incorporated in sec. 35 about it. We are unable to accept this contention. The Legislature could not have intended that an appeal should lie only against the refusal of the initial registration of a vehicle in the name of its first owner and not against subsequent refusals to register it in the names of subsequent owners. We agree with the reasoning given by the R.T.A. for holding that an order refusing to record the transfer of ownership on a registration certificate as required by sec. We agree with the reasoning given by the R.T.A. for holding that an order refusing to record the transfer of ownership on a registration certificate as required by sec. 31 should be deemed to be an order passed under sec. 27 of the Act which is appealable under sec. 35. 6. The second contention is that the Registering Authority should not record a transfer which is disputed. This contention also has no force. Sec. 31 provides for the recording of the transfer on the registration certificate merely on the report of the transferee. It does not contemplate any enquiry into the question of transfer by the Registering Authority before recording the transfer. If the registration certificate of the vehicle is produced by a person who alleges to be the transferee the Registering Authority has no option but to record the transfer. 7. Lastly it was contended that the application having been made beyond 30 days from the date of the transfer was barred by time and the Registering Authority had no jurisdiction to act upon such an application. On this point also we concur in the decision of the R.T.A. Sec. 31 in our opinion does not lay down any period of limitation for the recording of the transfer. It merely lays down a period of grace within which the transferee is required to get the transfer of ownership recorded on the registration certificate. Sec. 22(1) provides that no person shall drive any motor vehicle and no owner of a motor vehicle shall cause or permit the vehicle to be driven in any public place or in any other place unless the vehicle is registered in accordance with Chapter III. As we have already said above registration includes the recording of the transfer of ownership on the registration certificate. If the transferee does not get recorded the transfer on the registration certificate within 30 days of the transfer but drives the vehicle or causes it to be driven he will be liable to prosecution and punishment under sec. 112 of the Act upon a complaint made to a Magistrate. Thirty days is the period of grace provided during which the transferee can drive the vehicle or cause it to be driven without getting the transfer recorded. 112 of the Act upon a complaint made to a Magistrate. Thirty days is the period of grace provided during which the transferee can drive the vehicle or cause it to be driven without getting the transfer recorded. We are unable to agree with the opinion of the R.T.A. that mere failure to report the transfer within 30 days would amount to an offence punishable under sec. 112. Nor was the R.T.A. right in thinking that the Registering Authority could itself impose a penalty under sec. 112 of the Act on the non-petitioner for failing to report the transfer within 30 days. 8. We accordingly dismiss the petition with costs in favour of Loon Singh, non-petitioner.