The petitioner is the auction purchaser of 10 cents of land and a residential building in Sy.No. 77 (Re-Sy No. 50/6 of Peramangalam Village, Thrissur Taluk, Thrissur District from the 1st respondent Bank. Though the petitioner remitted the entire sale amount to the Bank, the Sale Certificate is not registered in the name of the petitioner by the 3rd respondent, issuing Ext.P5 objection memo stating that there is an attachment issued by the Sub Court, Thrissur and hence the writ petition.
2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the respondent Bank submits that the issue is covered in favour of the petitioner as per the decision rendered by this Court in Madhan v. Sub Registrar (2014(1) KLT 406).
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the respondent Bank and the learned Government Pleader as well.
4. As per the decision cited supra, it has been made clear W.P.C. No. 32051 of 2014 -2-
that, the attachments effected subsequent to the mortgage created in favour of the Bank, do no affect the title and ownership of the purchaser over the subject property. Such attachments have no impact on the sale conducted under the SARFAESI Act and they cease to have any effect or fall to the ground, the moment the sale is confirmed in favour of the purchaser/persons like the petitioner herein. This Court finds that the petitioner is entitled to have the benefit of the above judgment.
5. In the said circumstance, the third respondent is directed to cause Ext.P4 Sale Certificate to be registered in accordance with the relevant provisions of Registration Act/Rules, subject to satisfaction of all other requirements in accordance with law. The said exercise shall be completed at the earliest, at any rate, within 'one week' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition.
The writ petition is disposed of.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
kp/-