REJI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein is aggrieved by the steps taken by the 4th respondent Bank to sell the property covered by Ext.P1 sale deed which, according to the petitioner, was purchased by the petitioner after fully satisfied about the title of the 5th and 6th respondents. According to the petitioner, after the sale deed was executed, he is in possession of the property and he is also enjoying the same.

(2.) THE plea raised by the petitioner appears to be that the vendor has indulged in committing fraud by not disclosing the mortgage in favour of the 4th respondent. Various other allegations also have been raised in the writ petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that there is a clear marketable title for the vendor and the sale proceedings if conducted will prejudice the petitioner. In fact, the writ petition is not one challenging the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. It is clearly a case that the petitioner wants to establish his title and possession of the property.