The burden of proof in claiming partition in a Hindu undivided family lies upon the person who claims the partition. The right of redemption under Section 60 of Schedule II of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is crucial in mortgage-related disputes.

ORDER :

1. Although the matter has been listed under the heading ‘For Office Notes’ with the consent of the parties it has been taken for final disposal.

2. Petitioner in the present case is seeking following reliefs :-

“a. For quashing of judgment/order dated 08.06.2018 passed in Appeal No. 130/2016 by the learned Chairperson Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad whereby appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed.

b. For quashing of judgment/order dated 29.04.2016 passed in Appeal No. 1/2016 by the presiding officer Debt Recovery Tribunal, Patna whereby affirmed the order dated 05.10.2015 passed in R.P. Case No. 151 of 2013.

c. For quashing of order dated 05.10.2015 passed in R.P. Case No. 151/2013 arising out of O.A. No. 29.2013 by the Recovery Officer Debt Recovery Tribunal, Patna.

d. For quashing of order dated 02.09.2014 passed in R.P. Case NO. 151/2013 whereby the learned Recovery Officer has attached the HUF property including petitioner’s share also.

e. For quashing of order dated 13.11.2014 passed in R.P. Case No. 151/2013 whereby learned Recovery Officer has ordered to sale the property attached vide order dated 02.09.2014 by Public auction.

f. For direction to the respondent authority to carve out the share of the petitioner out of mortgaged property i.e. Khata No. 230. Thana & Anchal Sasaram, Mauja-Basantpur, Khata No. 46, Plot No. 90, Area 77 Decimal and then only sale remaining of it for realization of outstanding dues of the Bank.

g. For any other relief/reliefs which petitioner may be found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the property in question which was mortgaged with the Bank by his father and an equitable mortgage was created by way of deposit of title deed happened to be a joint hindu family property. He has relied upon a compromise order said to have been passed by Lok Adalat, Ara on transfer of Title Suit No. 140 of 1999 from the court of learned Sub Judge IV, Ara. The compromise petition has been enclosed with a typed copy of order dated 21.09.2000 (Annexure ‘1’). This Court has been shown from the compromise petition and the schedule enclosed with the compromise petition that the land in question had fallen in the joint share of Sri Arjun Singh and Smt. Bimla Devi (Defendant Nos. 1 and 2) along with their sons. Annexure ‘1/A’ has been referred to submit that the various land purchased in different names of the family members were brought in the joint hotchpotch of the Hindu undivided family and those were subject matter of partition. Some of the land which were purchased in the name of Arjun Singh (Father of the petitioner) had fallen in the schedule allotted to the undivided family of Arjun Singh and his sons who were minor at the relevant time. This petitioner was a minor at the time of filing of the compromise petition and passing of the order by the Lok Adalat is an admitted position.

4. It is stated that Arjun Singh along with his wife started a proprietorship business of M/S OM Fertilizers. In the year 2003, the business was converted in a Private Limited Company in the name and style of Jai OM Fertilizers Distributors Pvt. Ltd. having its’ registered office at Rukunpura, Bailey Road, Patna. Arjun Singh and Bimla Devi were the directors of the said Company. In connection with the said business, for obtaining working capital facilities of one crore, the property in question was provided as a collateral security. Initially the cash credit facility of one crore was provided which was later on enhanced from time to time and ultimately the cash credit had gone to Rs. Five Crores. The financial assistance was availed during the period 2007 to 2009. The petitioner admits that the borrowers (Respondent Nos. 3 and 4) who happened to be his father and mother respectively executed irrevocable and unconditional guarantee in favour the Bank but