ORDER :

1. Heard Sri G. Arun Showri, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Sridhar Veliveti, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-bank, apart from perusing the material on record.

2. In the present Writ Petition, the challenge is to the order dated 12.12.2022 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, in IR(SA) No. 6315 of 2022 in SA (UN) of 2022.

3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, they are the children of one Sri K. Srinivasa Rao and grand children of one Sri K. Nageswara Rao and the petitioners’ grandfather died intestate in the year 2005. It is further stated that the estate of the grandfather is managed by the father of the petitioners and there is no partition among the family members. It is further averred that after the death of the grandfather of the petitioners, the father of the petitioners and his brother started cotton business under the name and style M/s KNR Cotton Enterprises in the year 2006 with the income generated from the joint family properties and incurred huge loss in the business. It is further stated that the joint family properties are also mortgaged with the 1st respondent-bank and the father of the petitioners availed CC limit of Rs. 3 Crores, without the consent of the petitioners, who are coparceners of the property. It is further stated that the petitioners instituted a Suit for partition vide O.S. No. 112 of 2021 on the file of the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Guntur and the same is pending adjudication and the respondent-bank is also a party defendant to the said Suit.

4. The respondent-bank authorities initiated proceedings under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (herein after referred to as “the Act”) and issued notices under sub-section (2) and (4) of Section 13 of the Act. The respondent-bank authorities issued auction sale notice dated 07.11.2022 under Rule 8(6) of the Rules framed under the Act. The petitioners, by invoking the provisions of Section 17 of the Act, filed Securitization Application vide IR (SA) No. 6315 of 2022 in SA (UN) of 2022, for the following reliefs on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam:

“(a) To declare the Sale Notice for e-auction under Rule 8(6) dated 07.11.2022 which was served upon the Borrower which is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 under enforcement Rules of SARFAESI Act, 2002 as void ab initio and liable to be set aside.

(b) To declare that the classification of NPA of the Appellant’s account is not as per the guidelines of the RBI and procedure contemplated under law and thus the entire action as illegal.

(c) Grant stay of all further proceedings under SARFAESI Act, 2002 against the schedule mentioned property described in Sale Notice dated 07.11.2022.

(d) Grant such other relief or relief’s as this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.”

5. The Debts Recovery Tribunal heard the matter on the point of admission on 12.12.2022 and passed an order, holding that the petitioners are liable to pay the loan taken by their father and further held that the Securitization Application filed by the petitioners is not maintainable and accordingly, dismissed the Application.

6. In the above background, challenging the validity and legal sustainability of the aforesaid order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the petitioners herein have come up before this Court by way of the present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

7. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, which is impugned in the present Writ Petition is highly erroneous and contrary to law and not authorised by the statute i.e., the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, the Rules framed there under and the rules fr