HEERA GRANITES PRIVATE LIMITED, EDWARD ROAD, BENGALURU AND ANOTHER Vs. BANK OF BARODA, A NATIONALISED BANK, VADODARA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are before this Court seeking issue of mandamus to direct the respondents to forthwith issue a proper Sale Certificate with one single document of the current date to enable the petitioner to secure registration of the same in the name of the petitioners herein. In that light, the petitioners are also seeking for issue of direction to the respondents to forward a copy of the Sale Certificate to the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar as required under Sec. 89(4) of the Registration Act, 1908 (The Act' for short).

(2.) The Directors representing the petitioners in the instant petitions are stated to have participated in the auction conducted by the first respondent-bank with regard to the properly indicated in the Sale Certificate as also as the Rectification Certificate. Pursuant to the sale being confirmed, the Sale Certificate dated 31-3-2008 was issued. However, since there was certain error with regard to the discrepancy of the property in relation to the survey numbers, on the request made by the purchasers a Rectification Certificate dated 5-2-2013 is issued by the first respondent-bank. The petitioner-companies contend that though the Directors viz., Sri Vivek Khetawat and Sri Dharmesh Ranka had participated in the auction, the money belonging to the petitioner-company had been paid and such participation was on behalf of the company. In that view, the petitioners seek that the petitioner companies are entitled to receive the Sale Certificate in their name and an appropriate direction is to be issued to issue the consolidated Sale Certificate in the name of the petitioner-companies and also a direction to the respondents to dispatch a copy of the consolidated Sale Certificate with current date.

(3.) The respondents have filed their objection statement. Insofar as the Rectification Certificate that is issued, it is pointed out that since an error with regard to the survey number was to be corrected, the same has been issued on 5-2-2015. It is further contended that for all purposes the individuals had participated and the petitioners-company had not taken part in the auction process and the very fact that the company had written a letter stating that the Sale Certificate be issued as per the nomination to be made, will indicate that at this juncture the prayer made is not justified having earlier received in their individual name. It is their further case that when the Sale Certificate was issued on 31-3-2008 and a Rectification Certificate was issued on 5-2-2015, issuing any fresh certificate at this juncture would not arise. Hence it is contended that the very petition on behalf of the company is not maintainable and the same be dismissed.