Jonna Ralf D''sa vs Mahalakshmi Co-Operative Bank Ltd. and Thomas Rodrigues

B.S Patti

In this writ petition, petitioner is challenging the sale proclamation proceedings initiated in Execution No. 153A/2003-04 by the 1st respondent before the 3rd respondent - Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Kundapur, by fixing the date of public auction on 25.0:3.2011. The facts as emerged from the pleadings are that the petitioner is the purchaser of the property bearing Door No. 1-197/A situated at Airody Village, Udupi Taluk consisting of a residential house from the 4th respondent - Thomas Rodrigues vide registered Sale Deed dated 14.05.2003 by paying valuable consideration in a sum of Rs. 6,90,000/-. It is the case of the petitioner that he purchased property without the knowledge of the loan transaction that the 4th respondent had with the 1st respondent - Bank. It is the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner after examining the encumbrance over the property in question which disclosed that there was no encumbrance as on the date he purchased the property, petitioner ventured to purchase the same by paying nearly F:s.7,00,000/-.

It is the further contention of the petitioner that there is a residential house which is in occupation of the petitioner and his family members. The further case of the petitioner is that only after purchase, he came to know of the loan transaction entered into by the previous owner with the 1st respondent - bank and the award passed by the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies on 01.08.2002 ordering paying of Rs. 36,848/- along with interest at 20% p.a. against respondent No. 4. It is contended that the petitioner came to know of the same when the property was brought for sale by way of public auction as per the impugned notice - Annexure-J in the execution proceedings initiated by the 1st respondent - Bank before the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies.

At the time of preliminary hearing, this Court panted an interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to Annexure-J for a period of three months.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire materials on record. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner Sri S.K.Acharya submits that the petitioner is a bonafide purchaser for valuable consideration and that he is prepared to pay the 1st respondent the award amount along with interest provided the property is not proceeded against and the entire proceedings pending before the 3rd respondent are quashed.

In the light of this submission and in view of the fact that the interest of the 1st respondent - bank are fully secured and safeguarded by the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the considered view that the 1st respondent has to accept the fair submission made on behalf of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the 1st respondent also fairly submits that as long as the petitioner is interested to pay the award amount along with interest as awarded within a stipulated period, the 1st respondent will have no objection to receive the amount.6.nd drop the claim against the property. In the light of the above submissions, this writ petition is disposed of. Petitioner shall deposit before the 1st respondent -- bank the award amount along with interest at 20% p.a. as ordered by the Arbitrator vide award dated 01.08.2002 in Case No. 1492/2002-03 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit/payment, the execution proceedings initiated against the property bearing Door No. 1-197/A purchased by the petitioner from the 4th respondent shall stand quashed. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to proceed against the 4th respondent in accordance with law. It is made clear that if the amount is not deposited by the petitioner within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the lst respondent - bank will be at liberty to proceed with the execution proceedings by bringing the property for sale afresh.