Mohammed Ahmedulla v. State Bank Of India,

Betw een:

Mohammed Ahmedulla PETITIONER And

1. State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Management Branch, rep. by its Authorized Officer, D.No.6-2-915, 5th floor, Rear Block, HMWSSB Compound, Khairtabad, Hyderabad, and others.

RESPONSENTS

VRS,J & GSP,J.

W.P.No.9670/2016 ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice V. Ramasubramanian) Challenging an order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAECI Act, a person claiming to be an agreement holder in possession of the property, has come up with the present writ petition. 2.

Heard Mr. Mirza Safiulla Baig, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.S. Prasad, learned counsel for the Bank. 3.

The agreement of sale on the basis of which the petitioner had laid a claim, is stamped on stamp papers of Rs.100 and is also unregistered. Under Clause (1) of the agreement of sale the vendors are supposed to have conveyed and transferred the property as well as possession, in praesenti. It means the said agreement of sale, which is insufficiently stamped and not registered, is virtually a deed of conveyance, which is not admissible in evidence. On the basis of such an agreement no writ petition can be entertained. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

__________________________ JUSTI CE V. RAMASUBRAMANI AN _______________________ JUSTI CE G. SHYAM PRASAD 16th November, 2016 Js.

VRS,J & GSP,J.

W.P.No.9670/2016 Date: 16-11-2016 Js.