RE: LEGAL OPINION ON CLAIM REGARDING MORTGAGED PROPERTIES, A/C. M/S Company 1.
Please refer to your letter dated 13.03.2007 on the above subject.
You have forwarded a letter dated 01.03.2007 received from the Deputy Managing Director, Bank 1 (BANK 1) regarding mortgaged properties on account of Anis Corporation, a proprietorship concerned of Mr. x to us with a request to advise on the same.
It appears from the letter of BANK 1 that BANK 1 extended credit facilities to M/S T. L. Trading, a proprietorship concerned of Mr. Y against security of registered mortgage of 16.50 decimals of land and the owner of the property is the father of Mr. Y. BANK 1 has requested SBL to provide necessary co-operation and support to protect the interest of both the Banks and adjudication of the matter in favour of bonafied/true owner.
On the other hand, SBL case is that the property in question has been mortgaged by Mr. A, the owner of the property in favour of SBL securing the loan availed by Mr. x and SBL has already filed Artha Rin Suit, being No. 02 of 2007 on 04.01.2007 for recovery of outstanding loan by sale of the said mortgaged property. In such situation you have forwarded to us the letter dated 01.03.2007 of BANK 1 and requested us to provide our opinion on the same.
Our opinion is as follows:
SBL has already filed Artha Rin Suit in the Artha Rin Adalat, 4th Court, Dhaka against the borrower and mortgagor/guarantor(s) including Mr. A, the owner of the mortgaged property for recovery of its outstanding dues. Now, any dispute regarding the title or proper mortgage can only be decided in the Court where the suit is pending. Accordingly, SBL should reply the letter of BANK 1 stating inter alia that since the matter is now sub-judice, the concerned Court is the proper authority to decide the issue raised by the mortgagor/BANK 1.
If you have any further query, please do not hesitate to contact us.
For: “The Lawyers & Jurists”