Mr. Ranjit Singh, J.: - This petition is reflection of a sorry state of affairs in the working of the Cooperative Banks and Societies. Instead of being any help or assistance to a farmer, these Banks and employees of Agriculture Development Banks are seen conniving with their known persons to take away the landed property of innocent farmers, managing auction etc. in violation of the requisite procedure. Innocent agriculturists are at receiving ends.

2. In the present case, area of one acre of land pledged by the petitioner to avail and secure a loan of Rs.80,000/- has been auctioned for a sum of Rs.1,13,500/- whereas the conservative market value of this land would be more than Rs.10 lacs at the relevant time. Was it not for consideration of the management of the Bank to see in case the approach adopted by them was fair, just and reasonable. This is besides the grounds that such a course may not be otherwise permissible as per the provisions of the Punjab Cooperative Agriculture Development Bank Act, 1957 (for short, “the Act”) for auctioning the land.

3. Balkar Singh, son of the petitioner, had availed a loan facility of Rs.80,000/- from Primary Cooperative Agriculture Development Bank, Ferozepur Cantt. (respondent No.4) in the year 1996 for cycle repair shop. The petitioner states that his son kept on returning the aforesaid loan in instalments. At the time of affording loan facility, the Bank had got the thumb impressions of son of the petitioner on various blank forms and that of the petitioner as well, who had accompanied his son while availing facility of loan. The petitioner is illiterate person and he really did not know that his land had been mortgaged to secure the loan by his son, Balkar Singh. The respondent-Bank also did not apprise him of the same. The petitioner was only made to understand that these were the bank formalities for sanction of the loan.

4. It is alleged that the Bank had not maintained a proper account for the instalments paid by the son of the petitioners, which were deposited from time to time. This led to major difference in the outstanding amount. When some sort of dispute arose, son of the petitioner requested respondent-Bank to furnish the statement of his loan account for him to verify. The Bank allegedly never supplied any statement of accounts and always pressed for payment of the outstanding amount.

5. In Ist week of March, 2011, the petitioner received summons from the Court of SDM-cum-Collector, Ferozepur, with the copy of the application moved by respondent No.5 to appear before the Court on 11.3.2011. The petitioner contacted an Advocate at Ferozepur, when he was apprised that respondent No.5 has moved an application for issuing a warrant of possession of land measuring 8 kanals situated in the area of Village Hazara Singh Wala, Tehsil and District Ferozepur. It then transpired that respondent No.5 had allegedly purchased this land in an open auction on 28.11.2006. The petitioner naturally was shocked on hearing the same and immediately contacted the Bank-respondent No.4. He, at that stage, was apprised that the petitioner had mortgaged this land at the time of availing the loan facility and the said land was auctioned on 28.11.2006. The petitioner, however, claims that he had never mortgaged his land in question and accordingly requested respondent No.4 to supply the documents relating to auction of this land. Respondent No.4 only supplied sale certificate issued in favour of respondent No.5 dated 11.10.2007. The petitioner accordingly has approached this Court with a grievance that all the auction proceedings and all subsequent proceedings are illegal, arbitrary and liable to be set-aside. The petitioner would plead that he had never received any notice for recovery of amount from respondent No.4 and was never informed about the said auction proceedings. As per the petitioner, no notice was ever received by him regarding the same. The petitioner would plead collusion betw