GAHC010022182026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/814/2026 SMTI MANI DEVI D/O- JOY RAM SARMA, RESIDENT OF FLAT NO. 502, FIFTH FLOOR, AASHIANA ENCLAVE, VIP ROAD, KHANAPARA, GUWAHATI VERSUS THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AND 3 ORS CHENIKUTHI BRANCH, GUWAHATI-3, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER AND THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, SBI, CHENIKUTHI BRANCH

2:MOUCHUMI BORAH W/O- SRI KHANINDRA CHOUDHURY RESIDENT OF DR. S.K. BHUYAN ROAD DIGHALIPUKHURI EAST GUWAHATI-1

3:SRI KHANINDRA CHOUDHURY S/O- BIREN CHOUDHURY RESIDENT OF DR. S.K. BHUYAN ROAD DIGHALIPUKHURI EAST GUWAHATI-1

4:MR. ATIQUR RAHMAN DIRECTOR NEHARS AND ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.

CHRISTIAN BASTI G.S.ROAD GUWAHATI-0 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K TALUKDAR, K A SODIAL,MS. S T BOKTH Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

ORDER

16.02.2026 Date :

(K.R. Surana, J)

Heard Mr. S. K. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 22.01.2026, passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati in M.A. No. 50/2017 (in O.A. No. 4/2008).

3. In brief, the case of the petitioner is that she is neither the borrower nor a guarantor to the housing loan availed by the respondent no.2 from the respondent no. 1 bank, of which the respondent no. 3 was a guarantor. The property for which the loan was availed by respondent no.2 is a flat, of which the respondent no. 4 was the builder.

4. It is projected that by way of a registered agreement for sale dated 26.04.2006, the respondent no. 2 agreed to purchase the flat bearing sale no. 502 B, bearing registered deed no. 2131/06. The said agreement for sale was cancelled on 02.06.2006 by another registered deed no. 5595/06.

5. Subsequently, by a registered agreement for sale dated 27.10.2006, the petitioner entered into an agreement for sale with respondent no.4 for purchasing the flat which was shown as flat no. 502 in the said agreement. On complete payment being made, a registered sale deed was executed on

07.02.2007 and the petitioner was handed over the physical possession of the said flat.

6. Without any notice to the petitioner and without arraying her as one of the respondents, the State Bank of India had instituted an Original Application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati, which was registered as O.A. No. 4/2008 and the said learned Tribunal, by its judgment and order dated 30.07.2014, directed a Recovery Certificate to be issued against the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to the extent of Rs.14,79,400/- (Rupees fourteen lakh seventy nine thousand four hundred only) with pendent lite and future interest @ 9.25% per annum with quarterly rests from the date of filing till realization.

Accordingly, a Recovery Certificate was prepared.

7. Thereafter, the Recovery Officer visited the flat of the petitioner for enforcing the Recovery Certificate and came to know that the petitioner was occupying flat no. 502 and that there was no flat numbered as 502 B. Accordingly, the petitioner appeared before the learned Debts Recovery Tribunal pursuant to the order dated 03.08.2015, passed by the Recovery Officer-II, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati, and filed two petitions for impleading herself as a party to the recovery proceeding and for personal appearance, which is recorded in the order dated 08.09.2015.

8. Consequently, the petitioner had filed all the documents before the learned Debts Recovery Tribunal to show that she was neither the borrower nor the guarantor of the said loan and she had purchased the property, being flat no. 502 by way of a registered sale deed dated 07.02.2007.

9. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in its order dated 23.09.2015, the Recovery Officer-III, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati has categorically recorded that there was no sale deed was executed