IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7359 of 2024 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK ==========================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No Yes --

==========================================

TRUSHALI VAIBHAV SHAH Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================

Appearance:

KHYATI A CHUGH(10132) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR. PARTH H BHATT(6381) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR ANGESH PANCHAL AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ==========================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Date : 20/03/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. RULE returnable forthwith. Mr. Angesh Panchal, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of rule for respondents.

2. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the present petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal.

3. Present petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and under the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908 (for short “the Act”) seeking the following reliefs:-

“A. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction or command in the nature of writ of mandamus, quashing and setting aside the impugned order / communication dated 01.02.2024 issued by respondent No.2 herein.

B. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue as writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction or command in the nature of writ of mandamus, directing the respondent No.2 herein to register the Deed of Conveyance of lease hold rights in respect of property bearing Survey No. 3124, Ward No.6, Sheet No. 276 admeasuring 343.75 square meters, construction area 159.76 square meters, Plot No. 1886/B, situated at Atabhai Road, Krishnanagar, Bhavnagar.

C. Your Lordships may be pleased to hold and declare that the charge of respondent No.1 be declared to have been extinguished over the said property.

D. Your Lordships may be pleased to grant any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper in the circumstances may also be given.

4. Brief facts of the present case are that M/s. Raj Picture House was desirous to obtain financial facilities from the Bank of Baroda and for such purpose, it approached the Bank in the year 2013 and properties bearing City Survey No. 55, Ward No.7 admeasuring 151.80 square meters and Survey No. 3124, Ward No.6 admeasuring 159.76 square meters were mortgaged. It is the case of the petitioner that M/s.Raj Picture House failed to repay the financial facilities and, therefore, the Bank proceeded to auction the said properties under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act and after following due process of law, the Bank issued public notices for auctioning the properties. It is also the case of the petitioner that the auction was knocked down in favour of the petitioner and the same was communicated to the petitioner by email and pursuant to the aforesaid, the Bank executed a sale deed in favour of the petitioner conveying ownership of the lease hold rights and Bank issued a sale certificate under Rule 9(6) of the SARFAESI Rules. It further the case of the petitioner that the petitioner approached respondent No.2 for registration of the sale deed / certificate, however, respondent No.2 refused to register the sale deed and impounded the same on the ground that there was a charge over the property of the State Value Added Tax Department, which had passed an order of provisional attachment under Sections

45(1) and 45(2) on 22.07.2016.

5. In light of the aforesaid facts, the following undisputed aspects emerge:

(i) The Bank has conveyed the lease hold rights of the said property to the petitioner under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act which stands concluded.

(ii) The Bank also issued a Sale Certificate dated 18.10.2023 in favour of the petitioner.

(iii) The said auction