Allahabad High Court
Rajendra Prasad Singh vs State Of U P And 2 Others on 2 January, 2023
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 40 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36826 of 2022 Petitioner :- Rajendra Prasad Singh Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ray Sahab Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Dharmendra Vaish Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Ray Sahab Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel who has accepted notices on behalf of State and Sri Dharmendra Vaish, learned Advocate appearing for respondent Punjab National Bank.
The petitioner has preferred the instant writ petition for a direction upon the respondent Bank to execute a registered sale deed regarding Arazi No. 1884, Shop No. 838, Mauja Babina, District Jhansi and to pay the interest on the amount paid by the petitioner till the date it executes registered sale deed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, 'SARFAESI Act) the petitioner is an auction purchaser of the aforesaid property in question, however, even after issuance of sale certificate on 14.1.2021, till date the respondent Bank has not ensured registration of the property in question.
Sri Vaish, learned counsel for the respondent Bank has placed reliance on a judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Inspector General of Registration & Anr. v. G. Madhurambal & Anr., Petition (s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 16949 of 2022, dated 11.11.2022. He submits that following the judgement in the case of Esjaypee Impex Pvt. Ltd. v. Asst. General Manager and Authorised Officer, Canara Bank, (2021) 11 SCC 537, the Apex Court has held that mandate of law in terms of Section 17(2)(xii) read with Section 89(4) of the Registration Act, 1908 only requires the Authorised Officer of the Bank under SARFAESI Act to handover the duly validated Sale Certificate to the Auction Purchaser with a copy forwarded to the Registering Authorities to be filed in Book I as per Section 89 of the Registration Act. He further contended that in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court there is no requirement of execution of sale deed in favour of the petitioner.
Confronted with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioner states that till date the Bank has not handed over possession of the property in question. Thereupon, Sri Vaish, learned counsel for the Bank apprised the Court that process of handing over possession is commenced and will be concluded soon and immediately thereafter possession would be handed over to the petitioner.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the law settled in G. Madhuramal (supra) we are not inclined to issue any direction as sought for.
Needless to say that the Bank must ensure that possession of the property be handed over to the petitioner expeditiously.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Order Date :- 2.1.2023 DS