KUSUM LATA SOOD Vs. CANARA BANK AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in the present writ petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution is to an order dated 27.10.2010 (P.4) passed by respondent No.3-District Magistrate, Ludhiana whereby the Tehsildar, Khanna was directed to take possession of the land of the petitioner and that for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos.1 & 2 to settle the outstanding amount against the property of petitioner, which was mortgaged by Satwant Singh to the respondent-Bank as a guarantor.

(2.) Petitioner purchased a two storey built up house on land measuring 1 and ⅔rd marla from respondent No.4-Satwant Singh in the year 1998 for a consideration of Rs. 1,80,000.00. Respondent No.1-Canara Bank published a notice under Sec. 13(2) of the Securitization & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short "the Act") claiming dues from respondent No.4- Satwant Singh, who was the guarantor to the Bank as well as vendor of the present petitioner. Thereafter, on 3.12.2009 respondent-Bank filed an application under Sec. 14 of the Act to take possession of the secured assets of Satwant Singh and in pursuance of the same, the property purchased by the petitioner became subject matter of action by the District Magistrate. At this stage, the petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of this Court against the action having been taken by the respondent-Bank in recovering of its dues against the property purchased by the petitioner.

(3.) Before this Court, it was stated by learned counsel for the petitioner on 26.7.2011 that the Bank had sought to recover a sum of Rs. 23.98 lacs against the secured asset, purchased by the petitioner.