PUKHU Vs. SALES OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LAND measuring 15kanals18marlas comprising khasra Nos. 203/65, 205/66, 208/88 and 212/69 situated at village Chak Lal Din. tehsil Jammu, was transferred in ownership to private respondent No.3 under the big landed Estates Abolition act, 1950. He mortgaged this alongwith some other land vide mortgage deed dt.27.12.68 to take loan of Rs.20.000/ - from respondent N.2. Later, he fell in red and the land in question was ordered to be auctioned for sale vide impugned auction notice.

(2.) PETITIONERS case is that since private respondent No.3 had let out this land to him of which he was in possession since 1955, he lost his title over the land, which escheated to the State by operation of sec.24 of Big Landed Estates Abolition Act. As such, private respondent No.3 could not create any encumbrance on this land and mortgage it to the bank and borrow the loan. Nor could the bank enforce such mortgage in respect of this land,

(3.) IN the counter filled on behalf of respondents 1 and 2, it is submitted that private respondent No.3 had entered into a valid mortgage by depositing the title deeds which on verification established the land belonging to him at the relevant time and if he had allegedly lost his title later, it could not come in the way of bank to enforce mortgage against him and to recover the loan from the land in question. It is also pointed out that the execution/ registration of the mortgage deed was notified to the Revenue agency also, which should not have embarked upon correction of khasra Girdawari in favour of the petitioner.