S. Vaidyanathan, J.

1. The case of the petitioners is that, being a third party, they have purchased the property during the subsistence of the mortgage.

2. According to the learned counsel appearing petitioners in view of the decision of this Court in P.Valmoorthy vs. Authorised Officer, United Bank of India {2010 (1) C.L.T. 158}, there is no need for payment of Court fee.

3. The petitioners are aggrieved against the orders in S.A.Nos.314 and 315 of 2012 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madurai and the Tribunal has passed an order on 12.2.2013. Against that impugned orders, the petitioners preferred an appeal in R.A.(S.A.) Nos.51 and 52 of 2013 before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Madras.

4. The Tribunal insisted that the petitioners should pay the Court fee and also file a waiver application. The case of the petitioners is that there is no need for payment of Court fee as they are the third parties and in view of the decision cited supra and the proposition laid down in paragraphs 9 and 10 of the said decision, the petitioners are exempted from payment of Court fee. The petitioners also filed a petition under Section 18(1) of the Securitisation and Reconstructi