JUDGMENT :

DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ.

1. The petitioner claims that he was in possession of the property in question, by virtue of a registered Rent Deed, dated 22.02.2016, wherein he Was conducting his business. It is stated that after tenancy rigtlts were created in favour of the petitioner, by the owner of the property, a loan was obtained by the owner, who subsequently mortgaged the property in question with the financial institution - respondent No.2 herein.

2. The petitioner claims that while he was in possession, the secured creditor approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate-Cum-Principal Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Chittoor, in terms of the provisions of section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 for Obtaining Physical possession of the Property in question. It is stated that the learned chief Judicial Magjstrate ordered the appointment of an Advocate commissioner authorising him to take physical possession of the property in question.

3. The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.2 did not in the application reflect that the petitioner was in possession and running business from the premises in question, based upon a validly created tenancy in favour of the petitioner, and h