THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR DATED: 01-12-2010 WRIT PETITION No. 27934 OF 2010 Between: A. Srinivasa Babu ..... PETITIONER AND The Chief Manager/Authorized Officer, Canara Bank, Sultan Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad, rep., by Sri K. Penchalaiah and four others .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No. 27934 OF 2010 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not refunding the amount of Rs.20,00,222/- paid by him as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to refund the same to him forthwith. The petitioner was successful bidder in respect of plot No. 55 (East), Survey Nos.125 and 129 (part) in H.No.1-1-320/55, Mohan Nagar, Kothapet Village, Ranga Reddy District which was put to auction in pursuance of notice dated 05-02-2010. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 issued proceedings dated 09-03-2010 to the petitioner acknowledging the offer for Rs.20,00,222/- and asking him to pay the balance of Rs.15,00,166/- in addition to the earnest money deposit and auction deposit. The petitioner has paid the said amount to which the second respondent issued letter dated 15-06-2010 acknowledging receipt of the amount and stating that they are holding the link and other documents with them and will be released in his favour after registration of the property in his name. It is his grievance that though possession was delivered, the respondents did not issue the sale certificate to him for the reasons best known to them in spite of his making number of requests and that the officials of Federal Bank, Citi Bank and Vijaya Bank have started threatening him that the said house is under their mortgage and purchasing of the same from the respondent – Bank is illegal. Therefore he has issued legal notice dated 12-09-2010 to the respondent Bank to return the amount paid by him to which the Bank has replied by notice dated 28- 09-2010 stating that the sale certificate could not be issued in his favour since the subject matter of the property is pending in Writ Petition No. 5235 of 2010 before this Court. While so on 25-10-2010, respondent Nos. 4 and 5 issued advertisement in Indian Express newspaper stating that the property in question is under their mortgage and the same will be put to auction. Thereupon, the petitioner informed them that he is the owner of the said property but respondent Nos. 4 and 5 did not reply for the same. Hence, the writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that though the petitioner has paid the entire sale consideration, the Bank has not issued the sale certificate. The learned counsel for the respondent – Bank stated that the Bank has put the property in question to sale in public auction and the petitioner became the successful bidder, but he was not issued with the sale certificate because of pendency of Writ Petition No. 5235 of 2010. Since the petitioner has paid the entire amount of sale consideration, he cannot be deprived of his property. Further, this Court dismissed Writ Petition No. 5235 of 2010 filed by the borrower. Therefore, the respondents are directed to issue sale certificate to the petitioner within two days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As regards the grievance of the petitioner that some other banks are also claiming the property in question, since there is no privity of contract between himself and the other banks as he is neither borrower nor guarantor, he can approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal for appropriate relief. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. GHULAM MOHAMMED, J N. RAVI SHAKNAR, J 01-12-2010 ks