(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-
(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 4 to 6 Though notice had been taken out to respondents 2 and 3 by paper publication which was duly published, there is no appearance for the said respondents.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent Company had availed multiple loans from the petitioner Bank mortgaging 66 cents of property in Kozhencherry Village. The property belonged to Sri.Biju Mathew Abraham, who was one of the Directors of the 2nd respondent Company. The mortgage was created on 5/3/2014. Since the borrowers defaulted the payment of loan, the Bank initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act. Biju Mathew Abraham, who was the owner of the mortgaged property passed away on 4/6/2021. The mortgaged property was sold in public auction on 22/7/2022. However, the Bank could not register the sale certificate in favour of the auction purchaser since the 1st respondent directed the petitioner to produce materials to show that the attachment ordered by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Peermade is lifted. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had made necessary enquiries with the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Peermade, but it was found that there was no legal or proper order of attachment passed by the said court and that therefore, there was no attachment available to be lifted for execution of the sale certificate. It is submitted that the mortgage having been created on 5/3/2014 and since the owner of the property was booked for offences under the Kerala Preservation of Trees Act only on 22/10/2015, what could have been attached by the Magistrate Court, if at all there was an order of attachment, was only the surviving right of the owner of the property for redemption of the property from mortgage already executed. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, there was no order of attachment issued by the Magistrate Court in terms of Sec. 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and that only a proclamation under Sec. 82 had, as a matter of fact, been issued in respect of the property. It is, therefore, contended that there was absolutely no legal impediment to the registration of the sale certificate executed by the Bank after the property was sold in public auction.