R. Subbiah, J.

Since the issue involved in all the writ petitions is one and the same, they are disposed of by a common judgment.

2. The core issue involved in all the writ petitions is, whether the respondent’s banks can take possession of the secured assets after issuing sale certificates in respect of auction purchasers.

3. The facts, which necessitated to raise the above question by the writ petitioners, are as follows:

The petitioner in W.P.No.9043 of 2009 is M/s.Kathikkal Tea Plantations, represented by its Managing Director. The petitioner had availed a loan from the 1st respondent bank by mortgaging the property viz., the land measuring to 1.7 acres in R.S.No.163/3, 161, 210/1B, 210/2, 233/2, 121/10, 121/1, 372/3, 68/2C2 in Kengarai Village, Kotagiri Taluk, Nilgiris District and another 8.74 acres in R.S.No.202/2, 203/1, 203/2A1 and 457/4 in Konavakorai Village, Kotagiri Taluk, Nilgiris District. Since there was a default in making payment to the respondent bank by the petitioner, the debt is classified as nonperforming asset and the respondent bank had issued notice on 27.01.2006 under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets