(1.) The Punjab National bank sanctioned certain credit facilities to the petitioner. In compliance with the terms of the aforesaid sanction, the petitioner mortgaged her property by deposit of original title deed with the Punjab National Bank on 21.12.2007.The petitioner then addressed a communication dated 23.10.2008 to the Tehsildar (East), Ludhiana requiring him to enter a mutation on the basis of a mortgage created by the petitioner by deposit of title deed. The aforesaid request of the petitioner made to the Tehsildar, was forwarded to the Patwari of the village, whereupon, having considered the claim of the petitioner, the Patwari of the village refused to enter mutation. The aforesaid refusal is depicted in the communication. Annexure P4, clearly noticing that no entry in connection with the mortgage created by deposit of title deed could be recorded.
(2.) Dissatisfied with the determination of the respondents in refusing to enter mutation based on the mortgage created by the petitioner in favour of the Punjab National Bank by deposit of title deed, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus requiring the respondents to enter mutation in the revenue records without compelling the petitioner to execute a registered mortgage deed.
(3.) Along with the writ petition, the petitioner has appended a copy and the judgement rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Narvir Singh and another v. State of Haryana and other, 2007 2 ISJ(Banking) 266 (CWP No. 3533 of 2007 decided on 30.8.2007) , as Annexure P5. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the judgement rendered by this court in Narvir Singh's case squarely deals with the issue under reference. The Division Bench having placed reliance on the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Rachpal Mahraj v. Bhagwandas Daruka and others, 1950 AIR(SC) 272 concluded that it was not necessary to execute a registered mortgage deed in a case where mortgage is created by way of deposit of title deeds.