IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 13961 of 2010 Date of Decision: 21.04.2011 Chander Shekhar Jolly ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present : None for the petitioner. Mr. Rupinder Khosla, Addl. A.G. Punjab, for the respondents. **** RANJAN GOGOI, C.J.(Oral) The PIL-petitioner is an Advocate who is in the panel of a number of public sector and private banks. The petitioner has stated that the bank finance is often made available on the basis of an equitable mortgage by deposit of the title deeds which facts are not entered in the revenue record. Consequently, the property already mortgaged to the bank often changes hand compelling the banks to resort to multifarious litigation to protect its interest. A direction, therefore, has been sought that the factum of all such equitable mortgagees should be entered in the revenue records. Having considered the matter we are of the view that no such direction ought to be issued.Firstly, we are left with considerable doubt as to the bonafide of the present action which appears to be on CWP No. 13961 of 2010 [2] behalf of the banks. The banks do not suffer from any such disability or handicap which would require the intervention of the Court to protect their rights, if any, in the exercise of the PIL jurisdiction. We are, therefore, of the view that this PIL should not be entertained any further by us. It is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (RANJAN GOGOI) CHIEF JUSTICE (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 21.04.2011 'ravinder'