SMT. SARLA DEVI & Ors. v. BRANCH MANAGER, SYNDICATE BANK, BIKANER & Ors.

HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR, J. Mr. Sudheer Sharma for the petitioners. The petitioners are real sister of respondent No.4 and sister-in-laws of respondent No.5. The respondent No.5 is wife of respondent No.4. A loan was advanced by respondent Syndicate Bank to respondents No. 4 and 5 and for that purpose, a property situated at behind Jagdish Mandir, Cotgate, Bikaner was mortgaged with the Bank. The loan advanced to the respondents No.4 and 5 was not satisfied, therefore, under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, the proceedings were initiated and a proclamation for sale of the mortgaged property was issued. While challenging, the contention of counsel for the petitoner is that property in question is an ancestral property and the petitioners as well as respondent No.4 are having their share in that property. The respondent No.4 could not have mortgaged the entire property and, therefore, the proposed sale of the property is illegal. 2 I do not find any substance in the contention so raised. It is not in dispute that the property in question was mortgaged with the Bank and under the Act of 2002, it was not for the Bank to decide the issue of title of the mortgaged property, therefore, proposals to sale under the Act of 2002 is not at all illegal. If the petitioners is having any grievance against the respondent No.4 with regard to pledge the property in question, they may raise it before the competent civil court by way of filing a civil suit. The writ petition is dismissed. (GOVIND MATHUR)J. Anil/