Cosmos Co. Operative Bank Ltd. vs Central Bank Of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(SC) 367

J. B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVAN
Cosmos Co. Operative Bank Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Central Bank Of India – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Ninad Laud, Adv. Mr. Ivo Dcosta, Adv. Mr. Guruprasad Naik, Adv. Ms. Ishani Shekhar, Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Krishan Kumar, AOR Mr. Seemant K Garg, Adv. Mr. Nitin Pal, Adv. Mr. Nitin Mishra, AOR Ms. Mitali Gupta, Adv. Mr. Hargun Singh Kalra, Adv.

Table of Content
1. appeal arises from high court (Para 2)
2. loan facility and mortgage details (Para 3)
3. high court's findings on mortgage (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. submissions by appellant bank (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. submissions by central bank (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
6. court's analysis on mortgage validity (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
7. equitable mortgage principles (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65)
8. conclusion and ruling (Para 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70)

JUDGMENT :

For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following parts: -

1. Leave granted.

A. FACTUAL MATRIX

(a) We take notice of the fact that the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 respectively, are the original borrowers. However, the respondent No.4 has passed away and therefore his name came to be deleted from the array of parties vide order dated 4.12.2020.

(c) It is not in dispute that the Central Bank on the strength of an unregistered agreement of sale sanctioned the loan creating a charge over the flat.

(e) The rele