ORDER :

1. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing order dated 10.04.2019 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad in Appeal Serial No. 31 of 2018, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as “the SARFAESI Act 2002”) against the order dated 27.02.2018 passed by the Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ranchi in S.A. No. 13 of 2018 has been rejected. Further prayer has been made for quashing the Sale Certificate dated 23.02.2018 issued in favour of the respondent no. 7 pursuant to e-auction sale held on 16.02.2018.

2. The factual background of the case as stated in the writ petition is that the petitioner being a partnership firm availed credit facilities of Rs. 110 lakhs sanctioned by the respondent-bank on 10.11.1997 which was subsequently enhanced to Rs. 120 lakhs on 16.02.1999 and further enhanced to Rs. 147 lakhs on 14.09.2000. Thereafter, the said limit was reduced to Rs. 120 lakhs on 01.04.2002. One of the partners of the petitioner namely, Rajendra Singh, husband of Sushma Devi stood as guarantor for the said loan and also mortgaged his immovable property along with the immovable properties of another guarantor namely, Sushma Devi (three sale deeds kept as secured asset) for securing the loan. One more person namely, Vinay Kumar Singh also stood as guarantor. In the year 2004, the loan account became sticky as a result of which the account was classified as NPA on 31.03.2004 and at that time, the outstanding dues was to the tune of Rs. 1,47,48,616.37. The respondent-bank issued notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and upon receipt of the said notice, the petitioner filed objection under Section 13(3-A) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, however, the respondent-bank did not dispose of the said representation within the stipulated period. Thereafter, the respondent no. 6 issued possession notice on 03.08.2007 in terms of Rule 8(1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. The petitioner filed SARFAESI Application being S.A. No. 18 of 2007 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ranchi and the said application was allowed in terms with order dated 21.10.2020. In compliance of the order dated 21.10.2010, the respondent no. 6 issued fresh demand notice dated 23.02.2011 under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 with direction to deposit a sum of Rs. 2,82,31,947/- (principal amount plus interest due on the date of the said notice) within a period of 60 days, failing which appropriate step under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 was warned to be taken. The said demand notice was followed by issuance of possession notice under rule 8(1) of the Rules, 2002 with respect to the mortgaged properties which was also published in two leading newspapers in compliance of rule 8(2) of the Rules, 2002. After issuance of possession notice with respect to the mortgaged properties, the petitioner approached the bank for settlement of the outstanding dues of Rs. 212 lakhs which was duly sanctioned by the bank in terms of letter dated 15.03.2012, however, out of the sanctioned compromise amount, the petitioner could deposit Rs. 80 lakhs only and the remaining balance of OTS amount could not be deposited due to paucity of fund. Upon failure of the petitioner to follow the terms and conditions of the OTS proposal, the respondent-bank took physical possession of the property by invoking Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 on filing an application before the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Ranchi which was allowed in terms of order dated 21.09.2013. In the meantime, the respondent-bank published e-auction sale notice dated 11.01.2018 in daily newspapers “Prabhat Khabar” and “The Times of India” dated 12.01.2018, whereby the immovable properties as detailed in e-auction sale notice were scheduled to be e-auctioned on 16.02.