Unregistered documents cannot convey ownership of immovable property under the Transfer of Property Act, and the jurisdiction of civil courts is barred under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act for matters related to secured creditors.

JUDGMENT

Gaurang Kanth, J. (ORAL)

CM APPL. 50412/2022 (Exemption)

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application stands disposed of.

RFA 597/2022 & CM APPL. 50411/2022 (Stay)

3. The appellants (original plaintiffs) in the present appeal are assailing the impugned judgment and decree dated 17.08.2022 passed by learned ADJ-04, Central, Tis Hazari Courts in Civil Suit No. 837/2022 titled as Bijender Singh And Ors. vs. M/s. Religare Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd And Ors.

4. Vide the impugned judgment, the learned Trial Court was pleased to dismiss the suit filed by the appellants herein with a cost of Rs.50,000/-.

5. It is the case of the appellants that they had jointly purchased the built-up property measuring 45 square yards bearing House No. 75 with roof rights, out of Khasra No. 40, situated in Lal Dora area of village Jharoda Mazra, Burari, Delhi-84 (suit property) from respondent No.3 vide GPA, Agreement for sale and Purchase, Receipts, Will, Affidavit and Possession letter dated 15.01.2021 respectively, for a sale consideration of Rs.10 lacs.

6. According to the appellants, the respondent No.3 was the absolute owner by virtue of sale transfer documents comprising of GPA, Agreement to Sell, Affidavit, Receipt and Possession Letter and Will dated 15.01.2021 executed by respondent No.2 in favour of respondent No.3. The appellants remained in continuous occupation of the suit property since its purchase. Electricity connection was taken in the name of appellant No.3 and clearly earmarking the suit property bearing House No. 75 Village Jharoda Mazra, Burari, Delhi-84.

7. On 27.07.2022, a notice got pasted in the suit property by respondent No.5 in pursuance of the order passed by the court of learned CMM (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in M.A. No. 164/22 whereby the respondent No.5 was to take possession of the suit property as "Receiver" appointed by the said Court. The appellants filed various complaints to the police station Wazirabad. However, the police officials failed to take any action against respondent No.5. Later on inquiry, it came to the knowledge of the appellants that respondent No.1 had granted loan in the year 2015 to the erstwhile owner of the suit property based on some `illusory and fictitious' documents. According to the appellants, the property which was mortgaged to the respondent No.1 does not bear any municipal. Hence, it is the allegation of the appellants that respondent No.1 obtained the orders from the court of learned CMM by playing fraud upon them.

8. The appellants claiming themselves to be the bona fide purchasers of the suit property, filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondents with the following prayers:-

"i) Pass a decree of declaration, declaring the plaintiffs to be the owners and occupier of the suit property bearing H. N.75, with roof rifths, out of Khasra No.40, situated in Lal Dora Area of village Jharoda Mazra, Burari, Delhi-84 as shown red in site plan.

ii) Pass a decree of declaration, declaring order dated 13.07.2022 passed by Sh. Siddhartha Malik, CMM (Central), Tis Hazari, Delhi in MA No. 164/2022 in case tilted Religare Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd Vs. Dharmender Gopiram & Ors to be null and void and non-est, as it does not clearly earmark the property mortgaged / pledged or to be attached in respect of loans extended by Defendant company, which is vague and evasive, despite the properties in and around the suit property had been bearing municipal numbers since last 20-30 years.

iii) Pass a decree of permanent injunction in favour of the plaintiff an