Back
2009 Supreme(UK) 212
2009 (2) UAD 330
UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT
Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice V.K. Gupta and Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Bist
Writ Petition No. 15 of 2009 (M/B)
AND Writ Petition No. 05 of 2009 (M/B)
V.I.R. BUILDCON PVT. LTD. – Petitioner
Versus
THE COMMISSIONER & ORS. – Respondents
(CLMA No. 8654 of 2008)
In Writ Petition No. 05 of 2009 (M/B)
(CLMA No. 8758 of 2008)
(CLMA No. 8655 of 2008)
Adv. (CLMA No.3771 of (2007)
Decided on : 29.04.2009
Subject
Land Revenue - AUCTION SALE
Act Referred
UTTAR PRADESH LAND REVENUE ACT : S.162, S.172, S.173, S.174, S.161
Headnote
mRrj izns'k Hkw&jktLo vf/kfu;e] 1901] /kkjk&161] 162] 172] 173] 174 vkSj Hkkjrh; lafo/kku 1950] vuqPNsn 226 & uhykeh dsrk & lkafof/kd vf/kdkj dk ykxw djuk & izLrqr dsl esa lQy uhykeh [kjhnkj }kjk vius lkafof/kd vf/kdkj dks èkkjk&174 ds vUrxZr ykxw fd;s tkus ij cy fn;k x;k gS vkSj bl lkafof/kd vf/kdkj] vk;qDr ij rnuq#ih vk/kkj ij fcdh dks iq"V djus dk nkf;Ro mRié dj nsrk gS & lkafof/kd vf/kdkj dk ykxw fd;k tkuk tks fd dkuwuh izkfo/kku vkSj fdlh vuqcU/k ds vk/kkj ij izkIr gqvk gks] dh fLFkfr dkuwuh gSfl;r ls fcYdqy vyx izLrko gS ctk, ek= fcdh dh iqf"V djkus dh izkFkZuk ds & lc ls Å¡ph cksyh yxkus okyk] vk;qDr dks fcdh dh iqf"V djus gsrq] mlds fo#) ijekns'k ikus dk vf/kdkjh gSA
¼izLrj 9] 11] 14] 15] 17] 30] 33½
For the Petitioner: Mr. Alok Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Vinod Nautiyal, Addl. Adv. Gen.
For the Respondent No. 6: Mr. V.K. Kohli, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Arvind Vashishth, Adv.
For the Intervener : Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal,
For the Intervener : Mr. Lok Pal Singh, Adv.
For the Intervener : Mr. Sharad Sharma, Adv.
For the Petitioner:Mr. Arvind Vashishth, Advocate
For the Respondents No. 1 to 5: Mr. Vinod Nautiyal, Addl. Adv. Gen.
For the Respondent No. 6: Mr. Alok Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Adv.
For the Intervener : Mr. Lok Pal Singh, Adv.
[Per : Hon’ble V.K. Gupta, C.J.]
By this common judgment, both the Writ Petitions are being disposed of together.
2. In Writ Petition No. 15 of 2009 (M/B), filed by V.I.R. Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Which is an Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, the following reliefs have been claimed by the petitioner :
“i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, calling for the records and setting aside the orders dt. 10.7.2007 and 12.7.2007 (Annexure Nos. 18 and 19 to this writ petition), passed by Commissioner, Garhwal Division, Pauri Garhwal, Camp at Dehradun-respondent no. 1 and Additional Tehsildar, Sadar, Dehradun-respondent No. 4, in the office of Tehsildar (Sadar), Dehradun, respectively.
ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, calling for the records and quashing the auction notice dt. 20.7.2007 (Annexure No. 20 to this writ petition), issued by Additional Tehsildar, Sadar, Dehradun-respondent no. 4.
iii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondent authorities to confirm the auction bid of petitioner, made on 7.3.2007.
iv. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the respondent authorities to execute the sale deed of property in question in favour of petitioner and also hand over the vacant possession of property in question to the petitioner.
v. pass any other and further orders which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
vi. Award the cost of writ petition to the petitioner.”
3. In Amended Writ Petition No. 5 of 2009 (M/B), filed by Nakul Singh, the sole petitioner, the following reliefs have been claimed by him :
“i. A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to sale the property in favour of the petitioner’s nominee as they are ready and willing to pay Rs. 2.27 crore with above 5% and as the application to this effect already moved before District Magistrate.
i-a. a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 22.5.2007 passed by Commissioner Garhwal Mandal, Camp at Dehradun (Annexure no. 9 to the writ petition).
ii. A further writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to take steps for further auction of the property in question.
iii. Any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
iv. Award the cost of petition to the petitioner.”
4. Mayur Chalchitra Utpadan Pradarshan Evam Sahkari Samiti Ltd., 19-B, Ugrasen Road, Dehradun, obtained loan from District Cooperative Bank Ltd., Dehradun. Nakul Singh, writ petitioner in Writ Petition No. 5 of 2009 (M/B), stood as a Guarantor to the repayment of this loan. Nakul Singh, at the relevant time, was the proprietor of M/s Sanyog Enterprises, Dehradun. By way of offering his guarantee to the repayment of the said loan, Nakul Singh mortgaged part of Property No. 19 measuring about 2 Bighas & 11 Biswas situated at New Survey Road (Rai Bahadur Ugrasen Road) Dehradun, as well as the complete portion of the constructed building upon the said piece of land, which is popularly known in Dehradun as ‘Kanak Cinema’. Because the Loanee could not repay the debt or the interest thereupon or any part thereof, an Application under Section 70(1) of U.P. Cooperative Societies Act was filed against the Loanee as well as the Guarantor for adjudication of the disputes, through Arbitration, in the said Application filed under the said Section 70(1) of the aforesaid Act, the District Cooperative Bank Ltd., Dehradun had claimed an award of money on account of its entitlement arising from namely Nakul Singh. On 3rd June, 2000, in terms of the aforesaid U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, the Arbitrator passed an Award for a sum of Rs. 59,95,210.42/-, which included Rs. 19,72,373.90/- as the Principal Debt and Rs. 40,22,336.52/- as Interest accrued t
