Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. In our opinion, there is no merit in this petition. The petitioner had only produced an Agreement to Sell, Will and a Power of Attorney and a receipt for payment of money but these, in our opinion, do not constitute a sale. Under Section 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act, sale of an immovable property can only be by a registered deed There is no registered Sale Deed which the petitioner has produced.

8. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent No. 1,Bank, it is stated that the petitioner has no right, title or interest in the property in question. He has filed an impleadment application claiming rights in the property through documents which are fake and manipulated, and his aim is to defeat the claim of the respondent No. 1, Bank. The original documents relating to the property were deposited by respondents No. 2 to 4 with the Bank and these respondents have availed the loan facility granted by the Bank.

9. In paragraph 2.B. of the counter affidavit, it is stated that Shri Anil Kumar Bhatia has lodged a complaint with the Police that he has cancelled the alleged Power of Attorney and the petitioner has manipulated the documents and even the possession of the property is not with the petitioner. The respondent No. 3 had created a negative lien in respect of the property in question by depositing the original documents pertaining to the suit property with the Bank.

10. The petitioner has alleged that he has purchased the property for Rs. 2.90 lacs whereas the value of the property is about Rs. 15 lacs. Nobody in his senses will ever sell his property worth Rs. 15 lacs for Rs. 2.90 lacs. This itself shows that the petitioner has manipulated the documents. It is alleged that the petitioner is in collusion with the other respondents.