Summary
The auction purchaser was entitled to delivery of original title documents after the concluded bank auction, subject to an exception for land protected by a third party’s final civil decree. The guarantor’s repeated objections did not justify withholding all documents in light of its admitted mortgage and repayment offer. Questions concerning the Tribunal’s general jurisdiction and res judicata were not decided; the pending recovery proceeding and lawful contentions remained open.
Issues
- Whether the bank should receive original documents for delivery to the auction purchaser while the recovery application remained pending.
- How a third party’s final title decree affected release of documents.
- Whether the auction purchaser could appeal although the bank had not.
Held
- The guarantor had repeatedly contested the mortgage unsuccessfully, while admitting the mortgage on affidavit and offering repayment through a director. On these particular facts it could not repeatedly take inconsistent positions to delay completion of the concluded auction and delivery of title documents. (¶¶ 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15)
- The purchaser held a sale certificate and had a direct interest in receiving title documents. The bank’s failure to appeal did not prevent the purchaser from seeking relief; the bank supported its position. Filing the document-return application in anticipation of completion of the auction was not prohibited. (¶¶ 17, 18)
- A final civil decree recognising the third party’s rights over 1.80 acres in old Paimash No. 722/4 could not be ignored merely because the bank issued a sale certificate including that land. Documents concerning that parcel had to remain with the Tribunal pending final determination. (¶¶ 16, 20)
- The Court confined its decision to return of documents on the peculiar facts, without resolving the wider submissions concerning the Tribunal’s competence to determine mortgage validity or res judicata. Parties remained free to urge lawful contentions in the pending original application, and the Tribunal could issue appropriate further directions, including concerning documents released under this order. (¶¶ 19, 21)
Result
Appeal partly allowed. High Court decision reversed; bank’s application partly allowed for return of originals except documents concerning the 1.80 acres in Paimash No. 722/4 covered by the final civil decree. Pending recovery application to be decided on merits. No costs.