G. S. SANDHAWALIA, J.

The present judgment shall dispose of 3 writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos. 17785, 14741 and 15248 of 2012 since common questions of facts and law are involved in all the writ petitions. The facts are being taken from CWP No. 17785 of 2012, M/s. IAA Hospital Pvt. Ltd. and another v. The Authorized Officer, UCO Bank and others (hereinafter referred to as the main case).

2. The present writ petition is filed by the borrower and one of the guarantors challenging the sale notice dated 23.03.2012 (Annexure P-2) issued by the respondent-bank and the subsequent order dated 12.07.2012 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Chandigarh (for brevity, DRT) in S.A. No. 179 of 2012 whereby, the sale of the property has been confirmed in favour of M/s. Ludhiana Mediways-respondent No. 2, the auction purchaser under The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short the SARFAESI Act). CWP No. 14741 of 2012 has been filed by the brother of petitioner No. 2 in the main case who is a guarantor and had mortgaged his residential property measuring 400 square yards situated at Sukhdev Nagar, South City, Ludhiana which is mentioned at Sr. No. 2 of the impugned sale notice. Similarly, CWP No. 15248 of 2012 has been filed by proposed buyer of the property which was auctioned to respondent No. 2.

3. The pleaded case of the petitioners is that petitioner No. 1 is existing company duly incorporated under the provision of the Companies Act, 1956 while petitioner No. 2 is one of its Directors and also the guarantor with respect to the loan availed by petitioner No. 1 from the respondent No. 1-bank. Petitioner No. 2 is also the owner of one of the properties that is put to auction in pursuance to the sale notice, which is the subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition. That petitioner No. 2, along with others being joint promoters of M/s. IAA Hospital Pvt. Ltd.-petitioner No. 1 set up a hospital in Ludhiana namely Ludhiana Mediciti (hereinafter referred to as the principal borrower). In order to finance the project, the respondent-bank was approached for the purpose of the grant of loan facility. Six term loan proposals were sanctioned which were to carry interest @ BPLR+2% i.e. 14.25% with monthly rests. The loan was repayable in 84 months with the moratorium period of 12 months. In addition to the said term loan, the bank also sanctioned a cash credit facility of Rs.175 lacs which was to carry interest @ BPLR+1.50% i.e. 13.75% per annum. The details of the loan sanctioned read thus:-

Rupee Term Loan-I : Rs.304.87 lacs

(Run down balance)

Rupee Term Loan-II : Rs.133.19 lacs

(Run down balance)

Rupee Term Loan-III : Rs.185.12 lacs

(Run down balance)

Rupee Term Loan-IV : Rs.447.37 lacs

(Run down balance)

Rupee Term Loan-V : Rs.899.80 lacs

(Run down balance)

Rupee Term Loan-VI : Rs.400.00 lakhs

for purchase of machinery

4. Petitioner No. 2 executed a Deed of Guarantee in favour of the bank and also mortgaged his residential property. It is pleaded that the principal borrower hospital had grown up to a 100-bed hospital and it was providing services under almost 20 medical departments and had acquired state-of-the-art equipment and providing medical care to 400-500 patients in the OPD alone. However, the loan could not be repaid in time and the company fell in arrears and it was agreed to restructure the amount, which was approved on 30.05.2011. The bank, however, initiated the process under the SARFAESI Act and issued demand notice dated 13.05.2011 (Annexure P-3) under Section 13(2) of the said Act claiming an amount of Rs.22,84,74,378.43/- as on 26.04.2011. The objections were filed on 20.05.2011 to the bank (Annexure P-4). It was pleaded that no response was received on the said objections and negotiations were carried on and the petitioner offered to sell property bearing Nos. 200-201 at Vivek Enclave in Jalandhar in the name of the one of the guarantor