2025 (12) TMI 1375

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....art of respondent No. 1/Sub-Registrar, Sub-Tehsil Nigdhu, District Karnal in failing to register the sale deed in favour of the auction purchaser-respondent No. 2 (M/s Mahadev Foods), despite the said auction purchaser having been declared as a 'successful bidder' in the e-auction held on 21.09.2021 and depositing the entire sale consideration of Rs. 738.00 lacs, and the sale certificate having been issued in favour of respondent No. 2 on 29.09.2021. 1.1 The Bank has approached this Court aggrieved due to the above and the fact that failure on the part of respondent No. 1 to register the sale deed is causing grave prejudice to the petitioner-Bank as it is unable to recover the outstanding dues of Rs. 6,38,81,387/- as on 12.08.2018 standi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... undisputed at the Bar that the charge in favour of District Food and Supply Department, State of Haryana was created as late as on 28.11.2018 over the secured assets, whereas the charge of the petitioner-Bank over the secured assets was created much earlier upon deposit of original title deeds by the borrower-M/s Mahavir Cereals with the petitioner-Bank on 04.07.2013. 6. As such, this Court has to ascertain as to which authority i.e. either the State of Haryana or the petitioner-Bank, has priority over the secured assets. 6.1 It is undisputed that the charge in favour of petitioner-Bank was created in 2013. 6.2 Prior to the Amendment Act No. 44 of 2016, the concept of priority of charge in favour of a particular secured creditor w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gh Section 26E was notified only in 2020 and therefore, is not the basis of adjudicating priority in the present matter. Furthermore, the facts do not reveal that the IBC, 2016 has any application. 6.5 The petitioner has relied upon decision of a Coordinate Bench of this Court rendered in the cases of Deepak Kumar vs. State of Punjab and Ors., in CWP 8249 of 2018 and of M/s Kamla Engg. And Steel Industries, Ludhiana vs. Punjab National Bank, Ludhiana and others, 2020(4) PLR 669, where the petition of an auction purchaser in similar set of facts and circumstances was allowed. 7. This Court need not dwell upon the said aspect of priority in detail as the State has not pointed out to any Statute creating a statutory first charge in its f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pondent No. 2 based on the e-auction conducted on 21.09.2021 of the secured assets, and file compliance report within a period of two (02) months before the Registry of this Court, failing which the Registry is directed to list the case as IOIN before appropriate Bench. ii. The prior charge created in the Revenue records vide rapat No. 117 dated 28.11.2018 in favour of respondent No. 3/District Food and Supply Department, State of Haryana is quashed by a Writ of Certiorari. iii. However, the State of Haryana is at liberty to recover its dues of the Department of District Food and Supply/respondent No. 3, after the petitioner-Bank satisfies its outstanding dues, or by any other means permissible in law. 10. The cost of t....