• Should I be the third party in bank's ongoing case?

Hello Sir..! My name is Surinder. I am a bid purchaser of a residential property which is symbolic. In That property the defaulter has shown a tenant...made a rent deed 6 years back.. And said to his fake tenant to put a case against him that he is trying to get me off this house forcely. There was no litigation on the bank.
I have paid 25% Amt and trying to arrange the 75% Amt through loan from the same bank but from other branch. While the loan process has been started.. The bank started making legal search report. They ask me to take N.O.C  approval from GLADA (puda) to sell as the property is under GLADA. But the concerned branch has not taken any approval. Though concerned branch's Advocate said there is no need to take that approval as it is not required he can give this thing in writing.  But the GLADA authorities says that bank can not mortgage any property of GLADA without their approval. He cannot even Auction the property with out their consent. They said in their paper the defaulter is the owner of that property. 
Any ways I have continued the loan process. Now the concerned branch's Advocate called me and advised me to put a case for having stay to deposit the rest of the 75%  amt till the case has not been settled with the defaulter as I can get the possession then after only and make a Fd of 25% Amt which I have paid and the Interest should be given. Advocate advised me to be the third party in their ongoing case as the defaulter has made a litigation against the bank that bank can not Auction his property. This auction was not valid. 

Kindly suggest me I m very confused. If I put a case I can not show me as bonafide bidder.
Please help
Asked 2 years ago in Property Law from Jalandhar, Punjab
Religion: Hindu
You should have done due diligence before placing any bid 

2) if consent of PUDA was necessary to mortgage the property and bank had not obtained consent of PUDA then bank woukd not be able to auction property without PUDA consent 

3) in addition there is an added complication of tenant on the property  

4) you should seek stay of having to deposit balance 75 per cent of money till case is settled with the defaulter
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
46908 Answers
2775 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

1) There is no reason why you should become third party joining the ongoing case as firstly you have no dealings with the defaulter and secondly it is for the bank to deal with the GLADA.

2) As you rightly understood, your position as a bonafide bidder will stand scrutiny and other bidders can raise the issue, dragging you and the bank in.

3) You may stop the 75% loan from getting disbursed until the bank clears the deck regarding the banks ability to auction.If that does not happen, you can sue the bank for your losses. 
S J Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
2264 Answers
110 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

It is always better to remain off limits from a disputed property. The tenant has the right to seek injunction against his illegal dispossession by the landlord. Now if you intervene as a defendant you will have to prove that you have a cause of action against the tenant, which seemingly does not exist, albeit you can file a separate suit against the defaulter to restrain him from selling the property. 
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
23180 Answers
641 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

Buying a property without the possession of the same by the bank is not advisable.

Since you have already made an advance amount towards the sale consideration agreeing to the conditions of sale, you cannot withdraw now.

However you can follow the advise of that advocate which seems to be practical and can safeguard your interest for the time being. 
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
37100 Answers
403 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
  Ask a lawyer