ORDER :

1. Both the secured creditor bank and the original auction purchaser question the propriety of an order dated July 30, 2021 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal in Chennai. The order impugned has been passed on an appeal by the bank assailing an order dated May 06, 2019 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal II, Chennai in proceedings under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

2. The appeal raises a fundamental issue and needs to be dealt with on first principles. At the center of the controversy is a provision of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. Rule 9 of the said Rules pertains to the time of sale, issue of sale certificate and delivery of possession and the like of secured assets. Sub-rule (5) of Rule 9, which is relevant for the present purpose, provides as follows:

"9. Time of sale, issue of sale certificate and delivery of possession, etc. -

(1) ....

(5) In default of payment within the period mentioned in sub-rule (4), the deposit shall be forfeited and the property shall be resold and the defaulting purchaser shall forfeit all claim to the property or to any part o