ATAM PARKASH Vs. ALLAHABAD BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM-16984-CII-2025

(2.) The facts, as emanating from the revision petition, are that a suit (Annexure P-1) was instituted by the petitioner-plaintiff (Atam Parkash), praying for the following relief:-

(3.) The respondent-defendant Bank appeared and filed written statement. Thereafter, an application (Annexure P-2) was filed under Ss. 34 and 35 of the SARFAESI Act read with Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Ss. 9 and 151 thereof for rejection of the plaint. It was averred that one M/s Combined Petrochem through its proprietor Anup Trehan had availed credit facility from the respondent-defendant bank, the details of which were stated in the application. The total outstanding amount was Rs.2,24,18,268.23. Sh. Subhash Trehan, Smt. Kavita Trehan, Sh. Tarsem Raj through his power of attorney i.e. the petitioner-plaintiff (Atam Parkash) stood as guarantors and created equitable mortgage of three properties, out of which one property was the suit property. Apart from this property, two other properties i.e. a residential property measuring 262.50 sq. yds. situated in Urban Estate Phase-1, Jalandhar in the name of Subhash Trehan and property measuring 40 marlas situated at Village Kutlupur, District Jalandhar in the name of Kavita Trehan were also mortgaged. The suit property was mortgaged by the petitioner-plaintiff on the basis of power of attorney dtd. 27/8/2004 executed by the owner of the property (Tarsem Raj), who was the owner of the same by virtue of sale deed dtd. 28/1/1974.