JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Civil Suit filed under Order IV, Rule 1 of Original Side Rules read with Order VII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for a decree and judgment:

(a) for declaration, declaring that the Sale Deed dated 27.04.2005, registered as Document No.1121 of 2005 in Book I in the office of the Sub Registrar, Mylapore, executed by the second defendant and others in favour of the third defendant herein, in so far as it relates to the suit schedule mentioned property, as sham and nominal ;

(b) for a declaration, declaring that the Power of Attorney dated 18.02.2008, registered as Document No.325 of 2008 in Book IV in the office of the District Registrar, South Chennai, executed by the third defendant in favour of the fourth defendant as null and void in so far as it relates to the suit schedule mentioned property ;

(c) for a consequential declaration, declaring that the Sale Deed dated 20.02.2008, registered as Document No.379 of 2008 in Book I in the office of the Sub Registrar, Mylapore, executed by the fourth defendant in his capacity as Power Agent of the third defendant in favour of the fifth and sixth defendants as null and void, sham and nominal and not binding on the plaintiff in so far as it relates to the suit schedule mentioned property;

(d) consequently direct the fifth and sixth defendants herein to handover vacant possession of the suit schedule mentioned property to the plaintiff herein;

(e) directing the fifth and sixth defendants herein to pay damages for use and occupation at Rs.1,00,000/- per month from the date of plaint till handing over possession;

(f) direct the first defendant to pay interest at commercial rate of interest towards the entire sale consideration held by them from the date of issuing the Sale Certificate to till the date the plaintiff is put vacant peaceful possession of the suit property;

(g) for the cost of the suit ; and

(h) for any other relief or relief’s as this Court may deem fit and proper.)

1. The auction purchaser in the proceedings conducted under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (in short, “the SARFAESI Act”) has laid this suit after the confirmation of the sale challenging the sale deed executed by the borrower during the subsistence of the mortgage in favour of the third defendant and also for declaring the sale deeds as null and void, which were subsequently executed by the third defendant, through the fourth defendant, who is his Power of Attorney, in favour of the fifth and sixth defendants.

2. In addition to the above prayer, the plaintiff had also asked for damages for use and occupation by the fifth and sixth defendants. However, the relief against the first defendant to pay interest at the commercial rate of interest towards the sale consideration held by them from the date of sale certificate till the date of giving vacant possession to the plaintiff was given up by the plaintiff.

3. The case of the plaintiff is as follows:

(i) The first defendant - the Indian Overseas Bank, Assets Recovery Management Branch (in short, “IOB”) had issued a tender-cum-auction sale notice for the conduct of auction on 24.03.2007 (Ex.P.8) through its Authorised Officer, pursuant to the proceedings initiated under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act. As per the said tender notice, the upset sale value of the asset was fixed at Rs.1.60 Crores. The said proceedings were the result of the second defendant Dinakar Trading Company, who availed facilities from the first defendant and defaulted in repayment resulting in the account becoming a Non Performing Asset leading to the issuance of the notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act on 10.08.2002. The symbolic possession of the property was taken over by the first defendant in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act on 02.12.2003 and an order under Section 14(1) and (2) of the said Act was also obtained in Crl.M.P.No.120 of 2007 on 20.