(Revision Petition under Art.227 of the Constitution of India, against the proceedings of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pondicherry in Crime No.31 of 2004.

Petition under Art.226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to forthwith return to the petitioner such sums as would be due from out of the total sale consideration, after deducting the cost, charges and expenses and the dues of the 2nd respondent incurred upto 1-1-2005 on which date the possession had been taken over and forthwith return the remaining documents of title pertaining to the movable and immovable properties belonging to the petitioner after lifting the 2nd respondent's charge, sugar and molasses stocks.)

Common Order:

The above Civil Revision Petition and the eight writ petitions are disposed of by this common order as the facts involved in each case are interconnected and have a bearing on the issues arising out of the said facts.

2. On 25-5-1983, M/s. New Horizon Sugar Mills Limited, Pondicherry availed credit facilities from the Indian Bank, M.G. Road, Pondicherry, to the tune of Rs.26,50,00,000/-. The said mill offered as security its land and building situate at Ariyur. The Directors of the mill, viz. V. Kannan and V. Baskaran, stood as guarantors for the due repayment of the loan amount and they also offered their personal properties as collateral security. The mill, however, committed default in repayment of the loan amount. The bank after declaring the loan account of the mill as non performing asset, proceeded to issue the notice under Sec.13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short SARFAESI Act), which was challenged by the mill by filing a writ petition (W.P. No.33700 of 2004) before this Court. This Court, by order dated 6-12-2004, disposed of the said writ petition by directing the borrower-mill to repay the entire loan amount in three instalments and in default, the bank was entitled to proceed against the mill in accordance with law. The mill committed default as it did not pay even the first instalment as directed by this Court. The bank, in terms of the order passed by this Court, proceeded further and after complying with the statutory formalities under Sec.13(2) and Sec.13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, took possession of the property offered as security on and brought it for auction sale. When the auction sale notice was published by the bank, M/s. PNL Depositors' Welfare Association filed a writ petition (W.P. No.9834 of 2005) challenging the auction sale. While admitting the said writ petition, this Court permitted the auction proceedings to go on, but directed that the sale shall not be confirmed until further orders of this Court. Accordingly, the auction proceedings went on and M/s. EID Parry India Limited was the successful bidder, who deposited 25% of the amount, but the sale was not confirmed in their favour. There were several other writ petitions filed by other banks and other agencies to safeguard and protect their claims against the said mill. The workers/employees of the said mill had also filed a writ petition (W.P. No.10060 of 2005) seeking for quashing of the auction sale notice and to continue to run the mill. Ultimately, a quietus was given in the matter on 12-7-2005, when all these writ petitions were dismissed by this Court in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mardia Chemical's case (2004 [4] SCC 311). In so far as the writ petition filed by PNL Depositors' Welfare Association was concerned, this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the association to work out their remedy under the provisions of the Reserve Bank of India as well as Pondicherry Protection of Interests of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2004. On receipt of the sale confirmation letter from the bank, M/s. EID Parry India Limited, who was the successful bidder, remitted the entire ba