Delhi High Court
Vijay Gupta vs Central Bank Of India & Ors on 14 December, 2015
$~20.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 5638/2015
% Judgment dated 14th December, 2015
VIJAY GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr.V.P. Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr.B.B.
Gupta, Ms.Geeta Goel and Mr.Chetan
Swarup, Advs. with petitioner in person.
versus
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through : Mr.S.A. Khan, Adv. for respondent no.1.
Mr.Harish Malhotra, Sr. Adv. with
Mr.Anil Kumar, Adv. for respondents
no.2 to 5, 7, 8 and 10.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL)
1. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India seeking a direction to quash/set aside the order
dated 18.3.2015 passed by Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal in Misc.
Appeals (hereinafter referred to as the 'Appellate Tribunal') No.78/2015
in O.A.No.184/2001 and 79/2015 in O.A.No.185/2001, whereby the
Appellate Tribunal has dismissed the appeals of the petitioner in liminie
and upheld the order dated 20.1.2015 passed by Debts Recovery Tribunal
(hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal').
2. In this case, respondents no.2 to 10 had approached respondent no.1-Bank
for financial assistance. Title deeds of two properties i.e. (i) property out
of Khasra No.2/16/1, 2/17, 2/23, 2/24/2, 6/3/2, 6/3/1 and 6/4/2, situated at
Village Karwal Nagar, Ilaka Shahdara, Delhi-94; and (ii) the property
situated at Hodal, Haryana, were handed over to respondent no.1-Bank
with a view to create equitable mortgage over these properties.
Respondents no.2 to 10 thereafter cleared the entire dues of respondent
no.1-Bank and sought return of title deeds of the aforesaid properties,
however, the Bank was unable to locate the title deeds of the aforestated
properties. According to the Bank, title deeds of the mortgaged properties
were handed over to the then Advocate, Mr.Vijay Gupta, who was
appearing in the matter, on behalf of the Bank. According to Mr.Vijay
Gupta, who was then appearing, title deeds of both the properties are not
available with him.
3. With a view to solve this impasse, with the consent of learned senior
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, counsel for respondent no.1-
Bank on instructions and learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of
the borrower, present writ petition stands disposed of with the following
agreed directions.
i) Four certified copies of the entire chain of documents, obtained by
respondent no.1-Bank, with respect to the property situated at
Hodal, Haryana, have been handed over by counsel for respondent
no.1-Bank to Mr.Malhotra, senior counsel appearing on behalf of
respondents no.2 to 5, 7, 8 and 10;
ii) Mr.Khan submits that the Sub-Registrar-IV has informed
respondent no.1-Bank that the title deed of the property out of
Khasra No.2/16/1, 2/17, 2/23, 2/24/2, 6/3/2, 6/3/1 and 6/4/2,
situated at Village Karwal Nagar, Ilaka Shahdara, Delhi-94,
registered on 11.1.1988 at Registration No.88, Volume No.2009,
Pages 183 to 197, entered before Sub-Registrar-IV on 11.1.1988, is
not traceable with the Sub-Registrar-IV, Delhi. The Bank would
certify the photocopy of the aforestated title deed dated 7.1.1988 as
true copy and hand over the same to respondents no.2 to 5, 7, 8 and
10;
iii) It is agreed that a public notice would be issued at the cost of
Mr.Vijay Gupta, once the draft of public notice shall be finalised
between Mr.Harish Malhotra and Mr.V.P. Singh, within ten days
from today. The public notice would appear in the daily, 'The
Statesman', within three weeks from today.
iv) Mr.Khan, counsel for the Bank, also submits that the entire
payment stands received by respondent no.1-Bank based on a
compromise and the Bank has no lien over these properties;
v) Mr.Vijay Gupta, Advocate, who is present in Court, states that no
mortgage was created and the documents were used only for the
purpose of contesting the matter before Tribunal by the petitioner.
Counsel for the parties submit that in view of the arrangement arrived at
between the parties, orders dated 18.3.2015 and 20.1.2015 be set aside. Ordered
accordingly.
CM APPL.10153/2015 (STAY)
4. Application stands disposed of in view of the order passed in the writ
petition.
G.S.SISTANI, J
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
DECEMBER 14, 2015
msr
