STATE BANK OF PATIALA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner (State Bank of Patiala) agreed to provide financing facilities to Navin Wire Products (Private) Ltd. , Sultanpur Road, Kapur, thala (respondent No. 4), on December 20, 1972, as under. :

(2.) IN order to secure the advances to be taken by respondent 4, Narinder Kumar Anand (respondent 5) equitably mortgaged his land by deposit of title deeds. He was also a partner in the firm, " Messrs. H. L. Anand and Sons, Kapurthala", respondent 6. Income-tax arrears from that firm and from respondent 5 himself were due for the assessment years 1965-66 to 1969-70. The Tax Recovery Officer (respondent 2) sent a letter dated July 21, 1973, to the petitioner's branch at Kapurthala, calling upon it to i produce before him the original title deeds of the property mortgaged with the bank and to inform him about the balance of the loan due from respondent 4 as on June 20, 1973. A reply to that letter was sent by the petitioner-bank's manager on July 24, 1973, a sum of Rs. 3,37,748'35 was due from respondent 4 to the petitioner. On July 30, 1973, the Tax Recovery Officer attached the property of respondent 5, which had been equitably mortgaged with the petitioner-bank and on that date a sum of Rs. 3,18,666. 52 was due from respondent 4 to the petitioner-bank.

(3.) ON September 29, 1973, the petitioner-bank filed objections to the attachment under Rule 11 of the Second Schedule (Procedure for Recovery of Tax) framed under Section 222 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, to the effect that the land had been mortgaged with the petitioner-bank and the same could not be attached or sold by the Tax Recovery Officer in order to realise the arrears of tax from respondent 5.