M.R.CALLA, J. - (1.) This special appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22-12-1989, passed by the learned single Judge, whereby the SB Civil Writ Petition No. 4609/1989 was allowed.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts leading to this litigation on the basis of the pleading of the parties are as under :- (i) The Rajasthan Financial Corporation (for short Corporation) in exercise of its power under Section 29 of the Rajasthan Financial Corporation Act, 1951 realised and took over the possession of the truck, bearing No. RND 3873 from its erstwhile owner namely Mr. Ganesh Narain Meena. (ii) In order to realise its dues, the Corporation put the aforesaid vehicle (truck) to auction. In this auction, Mr. Shankar Lal Meena (Original petitioner) was the highest bidder at the bid of Rs. 1.07 Lacs. A sum of Rs. 27,000.00 was to be deposited within a period of 15 days from the date of the communication of the acceptance of the bid which had been approved later on. (iii) As per communication dated 10-10-1988, Mr. Shankar Lal, who was the highest bidder in the auction was required to pay Rs. 27,000.00 within a period of 15 days from the date of communication dated 10-10-1988 as aforesaid and the rest of the amount was to be paid in monthly installments in three years duration. (iv) Mr. Shankar Lal Meena was also required to execute an agreement to sale within a period of 30 days from the date of the communication and was to take the possession of that vehicle during this period. (v) Mr. Shankar Lal Meena was also put under an obligation to manage the transfer of registration and permit etc. of the vehicle at his own level. (vi) These terms were coupled with the further condition that in case the possession of the vehicle is not taken by the petitioner Mr. Shankar Lal Meena within a period of 30 days, the Corporation shall be at liberty to forfeit the amount deposited by him and vide communication dated 10-10-1988, Mr. Shankar Lal Meena was called upon to deposit 25% of the sale price and to execute the agreement of sale within 30 days. (vii) It is the case of Mr. Shankar Lal Meena that he deposited a Demand Draft in the sum of Rs. 5,000.00 and after the communication dated 10-10-1988, he deposited a sum of Rs. 19,000.00 and further deposited a sum of Rs. 3,000.00, making a total sum of Rs. 27,000.00 in the account of the respondent Corporation within time and the Corporation was also informed accordingly and necessary entries were made in the record of the Corporation. (viii) Later on , when Mr. Shankar Lal Meena contacted the personnel of Corporation for execution of the agreement to sale as mentioned in the communication dated 10-10-1988, he came to know to his utter shock, surprise and dismay that the vehicle (truck) had already been delivered by the Corporation and its officials to some third person (Mr. Gyarsilal) behind his back without informing him and without taking his consent. (ix) Mr. Shankar Lal Meena, therefore, preferred the writ petition on 21-10-1989 against the Corporation and its functionaries i.e. respondents No. 1 and 2 respectively and Mr. Gyarsi Lal as respondent No. 3 with the prayers as under :- (a) The respondent Corporation may be directed to exercise its powers under the Act of 1951, to resume and take the vehicle/truck No. RND 3873 from the respondent No. 3 and deliver it to the petitioner. (b) To place the entire relevant record of the whole case before this Hon'ble Court for its perusal. (c) Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which may be considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances, of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.
(3.) The writ petition was admitted on 1-11-1989. On behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, a reply was filed on 18-12-1989. Respondent No. 3 i.e. the appellant herein namely Mr. Gyarsi Lal also filed a reply on 22-12-1989.;