Dismissed

R.P.Mohan v. The District Registrar

Madras HC12 Jun 2024WP/9988/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the rejection of a request to make an entry in the encumbrance certificate. The court held the claim premature because a stay was not granted on appeals against the Debt Recovery Tribunal order setting aside the sale, and the security interest remained.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. No costs. Connected writ miscellaneous petition closed.

R.P.Mohan Vs The District Registrar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P. No.9988 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 12.06.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

W.P.No.9988 of 2023 and W.M.P. No.10047 of 2023

R.P.Mohan

... Petitioner

1.The District Registrar Krishnagiri District

¶11

2.The Sub Registrar Krishnagiri Joint I Krishnagiri District

¶12

3.Axis Bank Limited

¶13

Rep by its authorised Officer

¶14

1st Floor, Jawahar Towers New No.3, Old No.2 Club House Road

¶15

Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002

¶16

4.K.Dasarah

¶17

5.K.Murali

¶18

6.N.Prabakaran

¶19

7.K.S.Ragavendran

¶20

________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

Page 1/6

¶22

W.P. No.9988 of 2023

¶23

8.N.Dhanikachalam

¶24

9.K.K.Srinivasan

¶25

10.N.Dinesh Kumar ... Respondents

¶26

(R4 to R10 are impleaded as per order dated 02.04.2024 in W.M.P. No.24886/2023 in W.P. No.9988/2023 by NSKJ)

¶27

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to impugned order dated 22.02.2023 in Na.Ka. No.8627/U/2022 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to make necessary entry/footnote in the encumbrance certificate with regard to petitioner's property in the light of orders passed by Debt Recovery Tribunal - II, Chennai in S.A. No.199 of 2020 within a time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

¶28

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sudhan For Respondents : Mr.B.Vijay, Addl. Govt. Pleader for R1 & R2 Mr.V.Manohar for R3

¶29

Mrs.Vadhana Bhaskar for R4 to R10

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

_______ Page 2/6_

¶33

W.P. No.9988 of 2023

¶34

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order rejecting petitioner's claim to make entry in the encumbrance.

¶35

It is the grievance of the petitioner that the sale certificate issued by the bank in favour of the respondents 4 to 10 was set aside by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in S.A. No.199/2020. Hence, in this regard, he has given an application to make an entry in the encumbrance with regard to the sale certificate already issued in favour of the private respondents. However, the authorities have rejected the contention of the petitioner and directed the parties to approach the District Registrar. Challenging the said order, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶36

3.I have perused the impugned order. The impugned order indicates that as against the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, two appeals have been filed, one by the auction purchaser and the other by the bank. No stay has been granted. The order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal clearly indicates that liberty has been granted to the bank to proceed further by following the rules under the SARFAESI Act. Therefore, such being the position, the sale certificate has been

¶37

________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

Page 3/6

¶39

W.P. No.9988 of 2023

¶40

set aside only on the ground of technicalities and liberty is also given to proceed further.

¶41

At this stage, this court is of the view that no purpose, whatsoever, will be served to the petitioner as long as the mortgage is in existence and security interest has already created in respect of the property. That apart, appeal filed challenging the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal is also pending. In the event, the appeal being allowed, the original sale certificate automatically get restored. Therefore, again making repeated entries in the encumbrance will not serve any purpose to the petitioner. In such view of the matter, at this stage, the claim of the petitioner is premature. If the petitioner ultimately succeeds in the appeal and the courts are ultimately hold that the entire proceedings are vitiated, only in such situations petitioner's claim can be considered and not at this stage.

¶42

With the above observation, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶43

Consequently, the connected writ miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶44

12.06.2024

¶45

Speaking order / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No

¶46

________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

_______ Page 4/6_

¶48

W.P. No.9988 of 2023

¶49

Asr

¶50

¶51

1.The District Registrar Krishnagiri District

¶52

2.The Sub Registrar Krishnagiri Joint I Krishnagiri District

¶53

3.The Government Pleader High Court, Madras

¶54

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

¶55

Asr

¶56

________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 5/6

¶57

W.P. No.9988 of 2023

¶58

W.P.No.9988 of 2023 and W.M.P. No.10047 of 2023

¶59

12.06.2024

¶60

________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 6/6

R.P.Mohan v. The District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.P.Mohan v. The District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Selvi Vs the District Registrar

Indian Red cross society Vs The Special District Revenue officer (La)

N.Loganathan Vs The Sub Registrar

C.Anbalagan, Vs the District Collector

K.Shanmugam Vs the District Collector

K.Rajesh Vs District Collector