Can someone sell land to someone else when the land was mortgaged at the time of sale?

and belonged to the bank and the bank was not informed by the seller.would the bank release the title deeds to the new owner.even though the new owner did not know this at the time.

This is rather confusing, if the bank owned it only they can sell.

Regardless, any mortgages on the property have to be paid off to transfer title.

Not legally. There is no way the title could be conveyed to the buyer if a bank has a lien on it. The bank will not release the lien until the loan is repaid.

NOPE

Seller can only sell, transfer what they own

Seller owned property subject to mortgage, and transferring to new person has NO impact on bank/mortgage

New buyer may have been unaware and may have been taken, but can't feel too sorry for them because they didn't do anything they needed to do to ensure clear title: title search, title insurance,

buyer can sue seller for return of money; buyer can record their deed against property, but buyer has land subject to bank interest

IF bank actually OWNED property, and seller no longer owned it due to court action, then seller is liable for fraud and can be prosecuted and sued for that.

Buyer needs expert legal advice ASAP--should have had Before buying

If the bank actually owned the property, the bank would be the only one to sell it. If there's just a mortgage on the property, the bank does not own it, or even a portion of it. The person whose name is on the warranty deed is the owner.

If the buyer and seller just wrote up a contract and signed it, they've probably screwed things up. There should have been a title search at the very least and title insurance would be better, to see if there are any other claims -- like a lien for the mortgage -- on the property.

This is a case of "buyer beware". If the seller got his money, the buyer can sue him, but he may just be SOL. He should have gotten help if he didn't know what he was doing. The bank will not release the lien until it's paid. The bank doesn't have title deeds, whatever those might be. You really need a lawyer or a title company for every real estate transaction. Real estate is not a do-it-yourself activity.

Sounds like the buyer bought land through a quit claim deed, as such, the buyer bought the land with the encumbrance attached i.e. the lender secured interest in the property; if the case the lender has greater rights to the land then the buyer,

If this was not disclosed in the deal the buyers recourse is to go after the seller for fraud, but in this case the buyer should have done a title search before closing on the property and been wary of a quit claim deed, if the buyer bought the land with knowledge of the encumbrance not much recourse

Either way until the lender’s note is satisfied the lender will nor release the secured interest in the land, if the person on the note defaults the lender can foreclosed upon the property, leaving the current buyer with the difference if any from the sale price and the loan plus foreclosure costs

Your question isn't exactly clear but I believe the answer is YES, it can be sold. The mortgage or lien or any encumbrance is attached to the property and does not prevent a sale so this is indeed a situation where the buyer needs to beware.

The bank (which is both the lender and mortgage holder) does not own the property therefore it can't "release the title deeds" to a new owner.

Many people make this mistake.

nope as the mortgage is secured on the land as security if the mortgage does not get repaid they can sell it and recover cost

I'm assuming you are in the UK.

If the land has been sold or mortgaged since 1990 there are no title deeds. The definitive record of ownership is held by the Land Registry and will be available to anyone who wants it. This will include details of any mortgage.

When land is mortgaged the mortgagee (the lender) does not own it, so the legal owner can still sell it. But the mortgagee has a "charge" over the land. If that charge is not discharged (by paying off the debt) on sale then the new owner will be subject to the charge and they will have to pay off the debt.

In fact, when any mortgaged property is sold it is sold with the charge still in place, but it is a term of the contract that the mortgage will be paid off and the property released from the charge by the seller.

In your question:

If there was a mortgage but it had not been registered then it is unenforceable by the lender.

If the mortgage was registered it should have been up to the buyer to discover this and make appropriate arrangements to ensure it was paid off. If they didn't then it's the buyer's problem. They should consider suing their solicitor.

If the contract did require the seller to pay off the mortgage and they did not then you have to sue the seller for breach of contract. In practice their solicitor should have done this so you would sue their solicitor for his negligence in not doing so. If the seller did not have a solicitor then it is the buyer's solicitor who has been negligent for sending the money to someone who cannot be "professionally" trusted.

If the land is in fact unregistered then there will be title deeds. However, the general process remains the same and it is still up to the buyer to examine the deeds and to do a land charges search to find out what charges are in place. In fact, as the mortgage company probably does hold the deeds it should be impossible for the buyer to get the deeds without being aware of the mortgage.