Dismissed

Citifinancial Consumer Finance India Ltd. v. Sachin S. Dgare and Ors. and Shivo T. Rohra and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC17 Jan 2013CHS/265/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court, on an execution application, considered whether an attachment on a property hindered a subsequent sale. Finding the attachment preceded the prior sale deed and agreement but the applicant held a later registered title, the attachment was raised and the chamber summons was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The attachment levied on Flat No.1, Sabri Sadan is raised.

Citifinancial Consumer Finance India Ltd. Vs Sachin… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2013)

CHS No.265_2012

jsn

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.265 OF 2012

¶6

¶7

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO.417 OF 2011

¶8

Mr. Shivo Tolaram Rohra & Ors.

¶9

– Applicants

¶10

V/s.

¶11

Citifinancial Consumer Finance

¶12

India Ltd. & Ors.

¶13

– Opponents

¶14

Mr. P.S. Dani, Adv. i/b. Shivraj R. Patil for Applicant.

¶15

CORAM : MRS. ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATE : 17th January, 2013.

¶16

P.C. :-

¶17

The Chamber Summons has been taken out on 8^th February, 2012. It has been served upon the Decree Holder (DH) pursuant to which an affidavit in reply of the DH has been filed on 7^th April, 2012. The DH has not appeared for hearing.

¶18

2.. The Applicants are the purchasers of flat No.1 in Vahini Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. from Respondent No.5 Avatar Singh Sethi. The said Sethi was in turn purchaser of the flat from one Vishal Batra.

¶19

The Respondent Nos.2 to 4 took loan from the Respondent No.1. They sought to mortgage the said premises to Respondent No.1 upon the case that they had executed an agreement for sale in respect of the said flat with the said Batra. The Applicant has produced original copies of the registered agreements for sale dated 9^th June, 2011 and the sale deed dated 30^th November, 2009. The applicant

¶20

¶21

CHS No.265_2012

¶22

has also produced the share certificate of the society showing the transfer effected in favour of Sethi on 26^th May, 2010 from whom the applicant has purchased the suit property.

¶23

The attachment has been levied on 19^th May, 2010, five days prior to the said registration and three weeks prior to the agreement for sale. However, the earlier agreement of the predecessor-in-title of the applicant dated 30^th November, 2009 is well prior to the attachment.

¶24

The sale deed confirms title upon the said Sethi who has transferred the title under the registered agreement dated 9^th June, 2011 to the applicant. Consequently, the applicant is entitled to have the attachment levied upon aforesaid property raised.

¶25

Despite service of the Chamber Summons, the respondent No.1 / DH remained absent when the Chamber Summons reached hearing.

¶26

The advocate on behalf of applicant was directed to inform him of this date of hearing by fresh notice. Yet the respondent No.1 / DH has not appeared.

¶27

Hence the Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer 'a'. Attachment levied upon flat No.1, Sabri Sadan in Vahini Co-Operative Housing Ltd., Chheda Nagar, Mumbai-89 is raised.

¶28

Chamber Summons is disposed off accordingly.

¶29

( ROSHAN DALVI, J.)

Citifinancial Consumer Finance India Ltd. v. Sachin S. Dgare and Ors. and Shivo T. Rohra and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Citifinancial Consumer Finance India Ltd. v. Sachin S. Dgare and Ors. and Shivo T. Rohra and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Daanesh Rumi Irani Vs Ashish Daanesh Irani

Abha Ashish Dandekar Vs Ashish Subhash Dandekar and 2 Ors.

Shailesh H. Bajaj Vs Creative Outerwear Ltd. and Anr.

Jaswinder Paul Batra and Ors. Vs Ram Singh Batra and Ors.

Mary Aranha @ Apoline Maria Paul Arnha Vs Paul Aranha

Anthony Nelson D'Souza Vs Caridade D'Souza