S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2232/2009 Hanuman Agarwal Vs. The Debts Recovery Tribunal and Ors. Date of order : 20.03.2009 HON'BLE MR.GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS,J. Mr. M.S. Purohit, for the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has no locus to file this writ petition because the respondent Bank has taken action for outstanding of the respondent No.4 and alieniating the property of the respondent No.4 which was mortgaged with the Bank. The petitionerhas preferred this petition on the ground that an agreement was executed between him and respondent No.4 for sale of the property in quetion for the cost of Rs.8 lacs and Rs.21,000/- were paid by him as a part payment of the property in question which is admittedly mortgagted with the Bank. In my opinion the execution of so called agreement in between petitioner and respondent No.4 is not admissible in law, because the property in question was already mortgaged with the respondent Bank. In this view of the matter, petitioner has no right to file this writ petition, therefore, the same is dismissed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS)J. Rm/