AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anil Kumar Srivastava, Chairperson
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The instant appeal has arisen against an order dated 6th January, 2021 whereby the application of the Appellant was dismissed by the Learned DRT, Siliguri.
At the very outset Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that he had purchased the property from one Mr. Ranay Bhattacharya, Respondent No. 3, which was mortgaged but this fact was not within the knowledge of the Appellant. It is further submitted that a proceedings was initiated by the bank.
Learned Counsel for Respondent submits that the Appellant has purchased the property from Respondent No. 3 which is still mortgaged with the Respondent Bank. Learned Counsel further submits that if the Appellant is impleaded as party, he may be directed to contest the matter.
Having considered the submissions and perusing the record, I find that the Appellant is the purchaser of the property from the borrower; whether he was having knowledge of the mortgage or not is to be considered. But at the same time for ascertaining the fact whether the property was purchased by him and he is in possession, he should be given an opportunity to contest the matter hence, he is a necessary party.
On the basis of the discussion, I am of the opinion that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and is set aside accordingly.
Appeal is allowed. Appellant be impleaded as added Respondent in the original application. Upon such impleadment, Learned DRT shall hear the O.A. affording an opportunity of hearing to the added Respondent.
Copy of the order be supplied to Appellant and the Respondents and a copy be also forwarded to the concerned DRT.
File be consigned to Record room.
Order dictated, signed, dated and pronounced in open Court.