Single judge order dismissing a notice of motion seeking directions to deposit title deeds. Court notes bank already claimed compliance and surrendered receipt held by Sub-Registrar, leaving no orders.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NMS 1436 of 2010 (918)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1436 OF 2010 IN
SUIT NO.3463 OF 1987
M/s. Sagar Constructions Company .....Plaintiff Versus Manoharlal Kishorilal Gupta, HUF and Ors. .....Defendants and State Bank of India and Anr. .....Respondents
Ms. Alpana Ghone i/by M/s. Shah and Sanghavi, for Plaintiff. Mr. Ketan Trivedi, 1st Asstt. To Court Receiver, present.
Mr. S.K.Chaturvedi i/by M/s. Chaturvedi and Associates, for Respondent No.1.
CORAM: S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.
DATE: 16th JANUARY, 2014
P.C. :
the following reliefs :
(a) that Respondent No.1 i.e. the State Bank of India be ordered and directed to deposit all the original title deeds pertaining to the Suit property with the Respondent No.2 i.e. Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, forthwith in compliance of the order dated 26th March, 2009;
(b) that Officer of Respondent No.1 who took the delivery of the original title deeds of the Suit property
1/3
ssp
NMS 1436 of 2010 (918)
and who verified the Plaint in the Bombay High Court Suit No.199 of 1986 be ordered and directed to remain present in person in the Court;
Bank submitted that pursuant to the Order dated 26-03-2009, the Respondent No.1 Bank has already handed over all the documents in their possession in respect of the Suit premises to the Court Receiver. The Bank has also drawn my attention to the Affidavit dated 06-11-2009 filed by the Bank Officer recording the compliance of the said order. In the said Affidavit, the Bank Officer has stated that all the documents in their custody have been deposited with the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay. It is also stated that the Bank by its memo dated 06-09-1984 have recorded that no equitable mortgage is created by the borrower and only the original receipt issued by the Sub-Registrar of Assurance, Mumbai, for having submitted title deeds in respect of the Suit premises was deposited with the Bank. It has been also stated in the Affidavit that the original receipt issued by the Sub-Registrar of Assurance, Mumbai was already deposited with all the other documents of the borrower with the office of the Court Receiver. The Bank has also pointed out that by an Affidavit dated 21-08-1996 filed in Notice of Motion No.1324 of 1986 in High Court Suit No.199 of 1986, the borrower has categorically stated that no
2/3
ssp
NMS 1436 of 2010 (918)
equitable mortgage in respect of the Suit premises was created.
( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. )
3/3
ssp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the State Bank of India deposits title deeds with the Court Receiver when claiming no equitable mortgage was created.
M/s. Sagar Constructions Company
Manoharlal Kishorilal Gupta, HUF and Ors.
State Bank of India
S.J.KATHAWALLA
J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
