- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondent -Bank.
(2.) PETITIONER , before this Court, seeks a direction upon the respondent -Bank to execute the registered sale -deed in respect of the property being House no. 289/21A/1 Purafateh Mahamed, Naini, Teshil Karachhana, District Allahabad within the specified period. It has also been prayed that a mandamus may be issued to the respondent -Bank to clear all the dues regarding electricity, house tax, water tax and other municipal tax in respect of house in question. Lastly, he has prayed for a mandamus directing the respondent Bank to decide the representation made by the petitioner dated 7th November, 2014.
(3.) FROM the tender notice, which has been enclosed as Annexure -1 to the present writ petition, we find that two conditions were specifically mentioned therein (a) property in question will be sold "as is where is" and "as is what is", meaning thereby that the prospective bidders were told in clear terms and that they may satisfy themselves about the property and its liabilities etc., before offering their tender bids. The other relevant condition was that for further details, bidders may contact the Branch Manger, Vijaya Bank, Civil Lines, Allahabad personally or over phone, number whereof was disclosed. Therefore, in case of doubt, the prospective bidders were informed to contact the Branch Manager. We are, therefore, of the opinion that if the petitioner has offered bid in respect of the house in question, with reference to the conditions so mentioned in the advertisement and dues of electricity, house tax, water tax, other municipal tax etc. are found to be unpaid by the earlier owners of the house in question, then the Bank cannot beheld responsible for clearing such dues. Petitioner should have acted as a prudent man and should have inquired before offering the bid as to what are the outstanding liabilities in respect of the property. If the petitioner has failed to act as a prudent man, the Court cannot come to his rescue. Even otherwise, the respondent Bank cannot be held responsible in any manner for clearing of the dues, which are outstanding in respect of the property, which was then in occupation of the borrower.;