The petitioner's right to possession of the property obtained through public auction was not extinguished, and the court emphasized that the petitioner should seek remedy through civil court for eviction and police protection.

1. The Petitioner has preferred the instant Writ of Mandamus praying for passing of an order by this Court in directing the Respondents to offer police protection to him at his cost in taking delivery of physical possession of the property situate at Survey No.414-3C-1 of Gummidipoondi Village, Gummidipoondi District measuring an extent of 0.25 acres.

2. According to the Petitioner, one Arunachala Nadar obtained loan from Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation in the year 1989 for the purpose of constructing a Lodging House. The said Lodging House was constructed in the property given as collateral security for due discharge of the loan amount. In the mean while, Arunachala Nadar died in the year 2002 and the loan amount remains unpaid. The Third Respondent/Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation exercised its powers in terms of mortgage and also under the statute and brought the property for sale by a public auction.

3. In the meanwhile, the Fourth Respondent approached this Court by challenging the proceedings of the Third Respondent in W.P.No.35771 of 2003 and this Court, on 08.12.2003 disposed of the Writ Petition, whereby and whereunder, in paragraphs 3 and 4, it is observed as follows:

"3. Having regard to the above fact and with a view to give one more opportunity to the Petitioner, while disposing of the Writ Petition, I am inclined to pass the following order:

"Confirmation of the auction held today in favour of the highest bidder would stand deferred on condition that the Petitioner deposits a sum of Rs.50,000/- on or before 31.12.2003 with the Respondent and the balance sum of Rs.12,50,000/- shall be paid either as one time payment or in instalments on or before 28.02.2004. Failing compliance of the conditions referred to above would result in the order granting instalment payment today standing revoked with livery to the Respondent to proceed with the legal consequences of the auction held today and in that course this order will not come in the way of the Respondents. This Court is informed that the Petitioner had already given a representation dated 22.10.2003 to the Respondent offering an one time settlement and such a request is well within the time namely, 31.12.2003. Therefore, the Respondent is directed to consider that representation, in accordance with law and pass orders thereon in any event not later than 10.01.2004. If there is an order in favour of the Writ Petitioner, on that representation, then the Petitioner would not be entitled to the benefits of the instalment payment granted today and instead he has to adhere to the terms and conditions of the acceptance, if any on the one time settlement offer made by the Petitioner."

4. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. Consequently, the connected W.P.M.Ps are also closed. No costs."

4. Later, the Fourth Respondent approached the Third Respondent for one time settlement and waiver of interest. The Third Respondent/Corporation called upon him to pay at Rs.9,12,719/- towards one time settlement. Further, the Fourth Respondent failed to avail the one time settlement which resulted in taking of coercive action in bringing the property on auction.

5. In November, 2003, an 'Auction Notice was published in Tamil Daily 'Thina Thanthi' and the Petitioner participated in the public auction that took place on 08.12.2003. Four bidders participated in the auction that took place on 08.12.2003. He was declared as highest bidder and the bid amount was Rs.14,00,000/-. The sale was also confirmed by the Third Respondent Corporation. He paid the entire amount and the Sale Deed was executed in his favour on 06.05.2004 on the file of Sub Registrar, Gummudipoondi.

6. The plea of the Petitioner is that the Fourth Respondent [erstwhile property owner] had not initiated any action to set aside the public auction sale. The excess amount received by way of sale proceeds after adjusting the loan amount, viz., Rs.30,206.70 was paid to the Fourth Responden