VAISHALI SATISH GANORKAR Vs. SATISH KESHAORAO GANORKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants (original plaintiffs) are the daughters of respondent No.1 (original defendant No.1). Respondent No.2 (original defendant No. 2) is the bank from which respondent No.1 has taken a loan which has not been repaid. Respondent No.2 has initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Securitisation Act).

(2.) The appellants have sued to protect the share that they claim in the property mortgaged to the bank by respondent No.1. They claim 2/3rd share therein as coparceners of the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) consisting of themselves and respondent No.1. As the daughters of respondent No.1 they claim in the capacity as coparcener under the amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 (HSA) which came to be substituted by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005 (39 of 1956) which came into effect from 9 September 2005 (HSA).

(3.) Upon the creation of the mortgage in respect of the suit property, which is a residential flat of respondent No.1 by respondent No.1 alone in favour of respondent No.2, the provisions of Securitisation Act would apply to respondent No.1. For the orders passed under Section 14 of the Securitisation Act in respect of the rights of respondent No.2 as the secured creditor under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation Act the appellants, who claim 2/3rd right, title and interest in the mortgaged property, would not be able to file an appeal under Section 17 thereof. Hence the suit.