NIMMY SUNIL Vs. THE TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court with the following

(2.) The gist of the contentions raised by the petitioner is that steps are being taken by the respondents to cause sale of different items of the property invoking the machinery under the Revenue Recovery Act, without any regard to the fact that the said proceedings are not confined to the properties over which mortgage rights has been created in favour of the Bank.

(3.) The second respondent/Syndicate Bank has filed a counter affidavit referring to the sequence of events and also producing copies of the relevant documents as Exts. R2(a) to R2(c).