P.N.B HOUSING FINANCE LTD. HAVING CORPORATE OFFICE AT 9TH FLOOR ANTRIKSH BHAWAN 22, KG MARG, NEW DELHI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN SECRETARIAT RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Jaipur Development Authority (JDA) vide advertisement dated 3-11-2006 proposed uction on 18-11-2006 inter alia of plot No.GH-2 (Corner) admeasuring 6029.47 sq. meters) for group housing on the Gram Ratalaya Jaipur-Diggi road. Aside of the details of the plot to be auctioned, also set out in the advertisement were the terms and conditions thereof where it was also categorically stated that the plot to be sold by auction was on "as is where is" basis. One Jain Realtors Private Limited (respondent No.3) participated in the auction for the plot in issue and came out as the highest bidder having offered Rs.6900.00 per square meter aggregating to Rs.4,16,03,343/- for the plot in issue. The said bid was accepted by the JDA. Aside of registration amount of Rs.5000.00 and earnest money Rs.15 lacs, Jain Realtors Private Limited deposited in part a sum of Rs.27 lacs towards due amount following the acceptance of its bid on 21-11-2006. It also requested the JDA to be allowed payment of the remainder bid amount in instalments. Permission to deposit the bid amount in instalments as sought for by Jain Realtors Private Limited was not given by the JDA. Instead, under Confirmation cum demand letter dated 23-11-2006 the aforesaid Jain Realtors Private Limited was required to pay the remainder bid amount. It appears that Jain Realtors Private Limited deposited a further amount of Rs.24 lacs with the JDA under its letter dated 23- 12-2006 informing it that remainder due bid amount with reference to confirmation cum demand letter dated 23-11-2006 would soon be deposited, as arrangements to secure it by way of a bank loan were underway. An amount Rs.15 lacs was thereafter deposited by Jain Realtors Private Limited towards the auctioned plot on 29-3-2007 under two demand drafts of Rs.8 lacs and Rs.7 lacs respectively. Jain Realtors Private Limited simultaneously appear to have also raised a dispute with JDA with regard to its obligation to pay the due amounts under the confirmation cum demand letter dated 23-11-2006 on varied grounds such as there being no approach road to the plot in issue despite such a mention being made in the lay out plan referred to in the advertisement; there being no provision for electricity, water sewerage at the site; there also being no civic work commenced on the Ratlaya scheme.

(2.) Purporting to act on JDA's communication dated 6-12-2007 the petitioner states to have processed the request of Jain Realtors Private Limited for financial assistance for payment of the amount under JDA's confirmation cum demand letter dated 23-11-2006 and more and executed a term loan and hypothecation agreement dated 13-3-2008 with the borrower agreeing to loan upto Rs.5 crores against the plot's mortgage subsequent to the execution of the lease deed in its favour by the JDA. The loan amount was to be disbursed in stages subject to terms and conditions set out in the loan agreement.

(3.) The petitioner's case is that simultaneous to term loan agreement dated 13-3-2008, a Director of Jain Realtors Private Limited one Ajay Kumar Jain, after due authorisation also executed a Power of Attorney in favour of the petitioner PNB Housing Finance Limited and its officers appointing them as Attorneys to deal with JDA inter alia to create/ execute a mortgage over the plot No.GH-2 and also to give them an irrevocable Power of Attorney "to carry out the obligations of the appointer in regard to creation of the aforesaid mortgage and the matters connected therewith. Jain Realtors Private Limited also apparently authorised the petitioner inter alia to pay the due amount to JDA on its behalf towards outstanding on account of the bid for plot GH-2 and to take all steps as necessary or desirable for completion of purchase of the property. The petitioner also claims to have been authorised under the Power of Attorney to appear before the Sub Registrar to get the sale deed executed by the vendor and registered in accordance with law, to receive and take delivery of the registered sale deeds and other documents of title from the vendor and after registration from the Registrar. The petitioner under the aforesaid Power of Attorney was also purportedly authorised to execute mortgage of the plot in issue in its favour and have it registered. Besides, the petitioner claims to have been authorised to receive from JDA all amounts paid to JDA under the auction and confirmation cum demand letter dated 23-11-2006 in the event of cancellation of the sale of plot No.GH-2.