Zahid Khan v. State Bank of India and 2 Ors.

Appeal Dy. No. 61/2023 Date: 02.02.2023

Zahid Khan Vs. State Bank of India & Ors.

Present: Shri W. A. Siddiqui, counsel for the appellant,

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is a third party, as he is neither borrower nor guarantor to the amount in question, which is sought to be recovered by the Bank. It is contended that the property of the appellant cannot be attached/auctioned by the Bank, as no mortgage deed was created with the Bank and the mortgage deed was created for different property. It is, thus, contended on behalf of the appellant that the property of the appellant is totally different to the property, which has been mortgaged with the Bank, therefore, the property of the appellant cannot be attached/auctioned, which has been done in the present case.

It is further contended that the appellant filed S.A. No. 374/2013, in which an order dated 29.08.2013 was passed by the Tribunal below rejecting the application of the appellant for interim relief, against which an Appeal Sr. No. 397/2013 was filed before this Tribunal, which was allowed vide order dated 29.10.2013, copy of which has been appended at page no. 99 of the paper book, and the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal below for reconsidering the interim relief and to decide the case in accordance with law.

By way of the order impugned, the aforesaid S.A. has been dismissed by the Tribunal below on the ground that no specific relief has been sought for by the appellant, therefore, no relief can be granted. Reference in this regard has been drawn to the page no. 90 of the paper book, which contains