RAVINDER KUMAR BANSAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer in the present petition is for setting aside the order dated 30.07.2015 vide which Naib Tehsildar-cum-Assistant Collector, Derabassi (respondent No.4) refused to enter the mutation in favour of the petitioners on the basis of registered sale deed dated 11.07.2013 executed by IDBI bank on the basis of sale conducted under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for brevity, 'the SARFAESI Act') till such time Vasika No.3034, dated 04.06.2010, was cancelled.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioners had purchased the property in open auction, which was mortgaged. The possession thereof was given and sale certificate was also issued in their favour. However, in the meantime, during the subsistence of the mortgage deed, the owner had transferred the property in favour of one Mukesh Gandhi and Gurjit Kaur. The petitioners had earlier approached this Court by filing CWP No.5292 of 2015, which was decided on 29.04.2015, whereby, Naib Tehsildar, Derabassi had undertaken to take appropriate action in accordance with law. However, vide order dated 30.07.2015 (Annexure P-7), Naib Tehsildar rejected the mutation. He further submitted that original sale deeds were in the custody of the Bank and therefore no sale deeds could have been executed in favour of any one else. It is apparent collusion between the vendor and Bank.

(3.) Short reply has been filed by respondent Nos.1 to 4 stating therein that vide mutation No.9941, land measuring 0-2-8, i.e. 48/7680th share of land measuring 19-4, plots 8, comprised in above said khasra numbers was sold by Kamaljit Singh s/o Jaswinder Singh in favour of Mukesh Gandhi s/o Mamraj Gandhi and Smt.Gurjit Kaur s/o Parwinder Singh in equal shares (deed No.3034 dated 4.6.2010) through general attorney M/s U.T. Builders and Promoters Limited and further at the time of entering the mutation No.9941 on the basis of sale deed No.3034, there was neither any entry of equitable mortgage in the revenue record/jamabandi nor any appeal or objection was filed against said mutation. Moreover, at present, mutation is entered in the jamabandi for the year 2012-13. In such circumstances, it has been rightly concluded by the Naib Tehsildar that the mutation cannot be entered in the name of the petitioners till cancellation of sale deed is made in the name of Mukesh Gandhi and Gurjit Kaur.