K.K. Sonawane, J.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally, with the consent of parties.

2. The petitioner is assailing the order below Exh. 61 passed in R.D. No. 149 of 2009 dated 25.10.2012 by the Executing Court, Aurangabad, rebuffing the relief prayed in the application purportedly filed under Order 21, Rule 89 of CPC, to set aside the auction sale on deposit of the amount. The petitioner also agitated the propriety and validity of the common orders below Exh. 29 and 74 dated 27.2.2013, of the Executing Court, Aurangabad, thereby issuing directions to pay auction proceeds to the respondent No.2 ARCIL towards partial satisfaction of its secured debts as well as directions for payment of amount deposited in the court by the petitioner vide application under Order 21, Rule 89 of CPC to the respondent No.1 - Decree Holder.

3. The genesis of the petition culled out in brief is as under :- That, the petitioner availed financial assistance of Rs. 5 Lakhs from the respondent No.1 City Financial Consumer Finance India Ltd., for purchase of immovable property I.e. Flat No.3, Noor Complex building located at S.T. Colony Aurangabad. The loan agreement was executed on 7.9.