EH3 Rfi§*ELE HR. &§§TIfiE §.%.aa?LEfiBRA K$H%§ a--
EN 35 Exam $533? $3 KRKNRTAKE, EA§§ALsg$ 7_
3AT2n $312 $33 15" may Q? SEPTE%EER_2QQ5 :; *
EEEQRE
$32? PE?ITIGfi ma.1s§33;2fi@6 :$H~mE$§fiJafi)
E.'éI"f§*ar'"1'§.'<}'?.§.?.'«§
3 53: Enfizfi ?REBH§3ER
E'-Q?
£33"
'5
4..
:3~';r:.:%s E§§€..Ta'. ?F5.EBm.fi.5.-5' '
EQ%fi ?2 Egaas HWf._V
ma 3532, I$?,£R$58'=; _w;, -'»
2?¥aS£E;§%§a2€Bi-?;' *
§A§Q§Z%REM§§Q§?ij, x_'"*'
3E:VE§w:§_%§3fiam3§3
EEG EB@Z§3EEA3HAKAR '-
g§E&.A3au$*$:,EE§as"
fifi 3531; I5?*:Rm3$'""
3&3aHA§§fi.x§&a "
Eaggazaaaafiaaazi-'° ... §ETITEQ§ERS
'"»_g§% S%E.Ra§H3 éfiésan, Any, gag 5%: 5 xiv
C:'..~@.lJ5z.2}f:.'I'I-E'? E
TEE aga33§awz agezsraax
$§'smsQyEaaTIvE
$$fi§§?iE3, 2%: czaazg
"§fi$fiRRAJPE€
'q B$§3fiLa&E~§§a§13
§r*§\,§»**h-""13 gWM"\»¢;;;5Mg (m5'"QJ§'fg...;s!'¥V\mé?M m»:s.....O2l; ; ... RESEONDENTS
, {SE SR: R OEANDRANATH ARISA FOR RI
SRIrPRADEEP S, SAWKAR FOR M/S.SUNDARASwAMY
'- ' '_RAME'E,AEO ANANO EOR R~2
EMT; R. SQROJIEI MOTHANNA, AGA FOR R~3
'SR: O.S. SATIL, ADV. EOR R~4>
Q" l"2 fTRIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE
~.226 'AEO'g227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
'SEATING TO OIEEOT RESPONDENT N.l AND/OR 2 TO
EOREARD” THE SALE CERTIFICATE DULY
INOOREORATEO IN THE STAMP PAPER FOR
._~ REGISTRATICAI IN” THE IIAME OE’ PETITIONER No.2
‘_ AFTER MAKING SUITABLE ALTERNATIONS SINCE
*.MRS.IvY PRABHAKAR, ORIGINAL PURCHASER IS DEAD
EAND DIRECT RESPONDENT No.3 To REGISTER THE
“SALE CERTIFICATE IN” THE NAME OF PETITIONER
— — –1 – man yyusi Ur KARNATAKA
$90.2.
IEIUAA an ._ —
._ . . ..v..A’A-5.»:-uni ur NAKNAIAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA I-HGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HJGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH
respondent No.1 andfor 2 to forwardie7
the sale
incorporated in the stamp paper for.
registration in the ” name’ iof ”
petitioner No.2 éftert “msKing”i<V
suitable alterations since Mrs{ IVE *
Prabhakar, Originei.i'purohaser fis
dead and direct reé'épc§z@:§én.: NoV."3"wt.o
register the Sale Cettifieate,in the
name of petitioner=No{2,w. ti i
i%2?°Grant"sncH,other relief or
VMreIiefsg_sstitnis«-Hoh'ble Court may
deemsgrnfit_\_to[ grant in the
scircumstsnces"of the same.
certificate _fdni?ffr”V
{31_ Direct the respondents to pay
:ithe*_petitioners the cost of this Writ
uV_fBetition.
:4} Grant such other relief
OI.”
Vreliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deems
fit to grant in the circumstances of the
same.”
Inn.-. H… .. _
mun uvum Ur KAKNAIAKA HIGJ-iIA_CO.:UR’l’ OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH I
that the saie consideration has Jaetually
reached the Bank but also has indicates that
subsequentiy, the very award has been sub3eot ‘
matter of appeal before the KAT and it has
been set aside and _therefore;sithe§ sale
proceedings are also in jeopardy«eto{}
?. Sri Eaohnorasadgnsiearned counsel
appearing on behais of the fietitioner, would
very vehenentifi nraeathat the petitioners and
their préaeaéssarg who age oonafide purchasers
in auoubiietaeetionxsaie, have deposited/paid
neoessaryfi amonns,j6pat such aspect is very
oieariy proved in terms of a sale confirmation
‘ order Ceatsa 24.12.2002 copy produced as
“3nnexfire%s to the Writ Petition, issued by the
Assistant Registrar ~ first respondent; that
i.Vin the light of such authenticated version of
Tithe {Assistant Registrar; it is to be taken
that the petitioner’ has paid the full sale
consideration of the property; that the sale
g/o
certificate issued by the Assistant Reqietrar
itself should be taken to be tne–seLe”3eed;
that it was the duty~,off tneu]§s$gstant °
Registrar to have forwareée~:he,séae§Tp§pers
which the petitioner ned oeoostteooeiono witn
the sale certificate for grooer registration
of the «documenter.an§f £527 further follow’ up
action.
83 ,Leérned”f Counsel” Mr.§rasad, would
submit that ieqéi position in this regard is
well supportefi by the following decisions:
Vii} Single bench decision of
tthie High Court in the case of M/s.
vӴeu?nofi5on Plantations (India)
é§t,Etd., Vs. The Sr. Sub-Registrar,
*Madikeri and another reported in
“r2005 :4; KCCR 2786.
(2) Another judgment of the
Supreme Court in the case of
B.ARVIND KUMRR VS. GOVERNMENT Of
ENDLA And OTHERS reported in (2007)
If\l’\Fm I
E
. . ……t.A V_n_…\V’.-.:.II..JI\5 ur KAKNATAKA HSGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH
5 SCC page 745; wherein the Supreme,
Court had occasion to obser§ei’thaffldfl
in terms of section l?{2l(xiiii.of'”
the Registration ” HCt,3, i§e${‘t,a °
property sold by psblioiaficti§p_and?t
a sale certificate hissueddӤy%_theM
court, does not reduire registration
and therefore Aeveaj otherwise’ title
passes on the ooprt oehfirminq issue
of sale cert;ficate;_fl’ h’ f
9i {in ‘the fpreseht’ case, there are
serious” disfiutesx with regard to the actuai
payment or meney reaching the Bank which is
the_ saienicensideration for ‘the sale of the
eroperty sold “” 311 public auction. But, more
‘ importantly; the second respondent has also
‘giaced ed record that the Award pursuant to
which? the property had been sold for
“.reaiisation of the Award itself has been set
Easide and the matter has been remanded to the
Arbitrator at the instance of the fourth
respondent. gy//,e
lI’1l”|”\ I spun. –
10. It is aiso pointed outf’tfiati in
respect of that order of
remandinq the matter tc.>~~~t.£~;e
petitioner has filed a 2
review’ petition is aE._Vs’O.._ 1:>er1.Cl.i_r1C;_. ‘-._
ii. In a.%cenaffié sf this aature where
facts are disputes ass it gafisot be said that
the assertion {of kthef petitioners is the
conclusieei eositieeia irrespective of the
positios sf iawihan orser of the nature under
AnnexuAre’~AV been issued by the
Assistant Registrar is not an order fit for
“=wmaeihg{iQ sueieét matter for issue of a writ
iref_u’eflfiasea@us based on such an
orderfcertificate.
*:,ai2] xx writ ef mandamus will be issued
.j,oniy if the person is seeking for enforcement
»f”ar a constitutional right or a statutory right
«ar an undisputed legal right. If there are
doubts about the iegai right: itself,_’v,m:_’i~1; of
mandamus cannot be issued.
13. While writ of hmndamus is deelined,7
it does not mean that Vthis otder’*1s”gahy
determination or profieQncemefit’cn the merits
of’ the ciainw Ueft the “petitioners “either on
facts or in law. 5V
14. It is epeg;tejtfie petitiafiets to work
out their right? aha temefiies fiefete any mflmr
forum in aeeordaaeefmith law for the Pufixee
of achieving t§e;elief=m§iee the petithymrs
have souqfit for ifi this writ petition.
‘w.;L£;;au–tf».g;;::sé-;;..~g&;;.ice to the rights of the
iufiarties swhich “can be worked out elsewhere,
“this writ getition is dismissed.
2 Sdf.
Judge
“u.é’1.* ”
HIGH QUERY OF KARNATAKA HIGHA’ OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH C
an/–