ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.

1. All the Writ Petitions are heard finally by consent. The issues are common and interconnected therefore, by this common Judgment, all Petitions are disposed of based on common facts and circumstances.

2. We have decided these Petitions after dealing with the issues so raised by titling and indexing accordingly based upon the pleadings and oral and written submissions of the learned Senior Counsel/Advocates appearing for the respective parties.

EVENTS:

(A) The Petitioner Borrower-Blue Coast Hotels Limited (BCHL)'s case.

3. On 17 February 2010, Respondent No. 1 IFCI (Secured Creditor), issued a sanction letter to BCHL for loan of Rs. 150 crore viz. (i) Rs. 70 crores to pay off BCHL's erstwhile lenders, (ii) Rs. 80 crores to be invested by the in the equity of the Joint Venture Company i.e. Silver Resort Hotel India Private Limited (“SRHIPL”) that was to undertake the Aerocity project of Delhi, India's First Hotel District. On the same day, IFCI issued a sanction letter for loan of Rs. 85 crore. IFCI agreed to participate in the equity on private placement basis and to partner in a Joint Venture with BCHL in the said Aerocity project. SRHIPL, a special purpose vehicle was incorporated to undertake the Project. About 85000000 equity shares of the face value of Rs. 10 each was issued to IFCI. On 26 February 2010, the Corporate Loan Agreement was executed for Rs. 150 Crores. On 4 May 2012, an order was passed by the State Government of Goa, by which the conversion of land of BCHL from agricultural to nonagricultural was put on hold.

4. On 26 March 2013, a notice under Section 13(2) of The Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, “the SARFAESI Act”) issued by IFCI with respect to Corporate Loan, demanding payment of Rs. 135,15,97,443/, threatening to enforce its rights, inter alia, against the movable and immovable property so mortgaged/charged, including agricultural property also. On 27 May 2013, a representation was made by BCHL to the above notice. IFCI failed to respond to the same. On 18 June 2013, IFCI took symbolic possession of the property (Hotel Park Hyatt) (Goa Hotel), including the agricultural land. According to BCHL the symbolic possession was taken without delivering the possession notice as required under Rule 8(1) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, (for short, “Enforcement Rules”). On 20 June 2013, IFCI communicated having taken the symbolic possession of the property on 18 June 2013.

5. On 31 July 2013, BCHL filed Securitisation Application No. 33 of 2014 in Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) III, Mumbai. On 4 September 2013, IFCI published first sale notice and the reserve price of Rs. 403 crores was fixed. On 8 October 2013, the sale was postponed. On 9 January 2014, IFCI published second sale notice and the same reserve price was fixed. On 6 February 2014, DRT passed an interim order, directing IFCI to defer acceptance of bid and directed not to take any further steps for sale of the property for next 60 days. Subsequently, no bids were received and the auction failed. On 7 March 2014, IFCI challenged DRT order before Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT). DRAT directed DRT to dispose of the SA, by the end of the month and the Appeal was disposed of.

6. On 31 March 2014, DRT set aside 13(2) notice dated 26 March 2013, interalia on the ground of noncompliance of Section 13(3A) and that the Demand Notice was issued jointly for agricultural land to which the provisions of the SARFAESI Act did not apply as per Section 31(i). On 2 May 2014, IFCI filed an Appeal. On 10 September 2014, DRAT allowed the Appeal and set aside the order of DRT. Therefore, BCHL filed the present Writ Petition No. 222 of 2015, on 4 October 2014.

7. On 8 October 2014, IFCI issued third auction notice and the reserve price of Rs. 542.57 cro