INUGANTI RANGABABU Vs. DEENA BANK/BANK OF BARODA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner in nutshell is that he became the as successful bidder in the auction conducted by the respondent bank and pursuantly he paid advance amount of Rs.50,00,000.00 and later he went to the location of the property and having noticed that there is dispute with regard to identification of property, he addressed a letter dtd. 13/5/2019 to the bank with a request to conduct survey for identification and demarcation of the subject property. For no response, the petitioner got issued a legal notice dtd. 3/6/2021 requesting the Bank to clear the cloud and dispute over the property or else to refund the advance amount already paid by him. Thereafter, the respondent bank informed the petitioner through Whatsapp message that survey would be conducted on 02. 12.2022. However, survey could not be conducted on that day as surveyor did not come to the spot. Thereafter, when the respondent bank is insisting for payment of balance sale consideration, the petitioner got issued a legal notice to the bank dtd. 5/12/2022 requiring them to get the survey completed and possession of the property be delivered after receiving balance amount, whereas, the bank issued notice dtd. 9/12/2022 without referring to the aspect of survey for identification of auctioned property demanded the petitioner to pay the balance sale consideration within 7 days or else the advance amount already collected by them would be forfeited. To the said notice, the petitioner got issued a reply notice dtd. 17/12/2022 mentioning all the facts and requiring the bank to conduct survey and localise the property and receive the balance amount, in the event of their failure to do so, refund the advance amount paid already along with interest. In reply, respondent Bank issued notice dtd. 27/12/2022 demanding and threatening the petitioner to pay the balance amount, or else, they would forfeit the advance amount paid. The said notice is impugned in this writ petition.

(2.) The respondent Bank filed counter stating that the Bank is in possession of the subject property and is always ready and willing to execute regular registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner, after verifying the Revenue Records available. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

(3.) Initially this writ petition is filed to direct the respondent bank to conduct survey, identify and demarcate the property purchased by the petitioner in the auction conducted by the Bank and handover physical possession to the petitioner by receiving balance sale consideration, issue sale certificate and register the same. Subsequently, the relief sought is amended to the effect that in case the respondent bank failed to do so, direct the bank to refund the advance amount already collected along with interest at quarterly rests to the petitioner as per the Reserve Bank Guidelines applicable for commercial transactions.