Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.: - This petition is preferred by a Private Limited Company and its Directors against the order dated 07.04.2015 passed by the DRT-II, Chandigarh, declining to entertain the Securitization Application (hereinafter referred to as the “SA”) in respect of the secured property situated in Himachal Pradesh, relegating the petitioners to move to the DRT-I, and order dated 08.06.2015, dismissing the review application as well. \

2. In brief, the petitioners (hereinafter referred to as the “Company”) availed credit facilities from the State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as the “Bank”) after mortgaging its six properties, out of which 5 properties were situated at Jalandhar and one property, i.e. factory land and building at Indora, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. The Company was closed and it represented to the Bank for a settlement under the One Time Settlement (OTS) scheme after selling its properties mortgaged with the Bank, but while the negotiations were going on, the Stressed Assets Management Branch of the Bank issued a demand notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the “SARFAESI Act”) for recovery of an amount of Rs.24,74,67,388.55/-. The objections filed by the petitioners on 22.09.2013 were replied by the Bank on 09.10.2013 and the account was agreed to be settled for a total amount of Rs.14.25 crores. The Company paid Rs.1.65 crores for the release of 3 properties and requested the Bank to release two more properties mentioned at Sr. Nos.3 & 5 of the OTS letter against the deposit of Rs.2.10 crores but the Bank did not agree. In October and December, 2014, the Company gave a proposal to the Bank for release of plant and machinery in blocks for realization of Rs.7.50 crores but instead of accepting the said proposal, the Bank cancelled the OTS prematurely vide its letter dated 09.01.2015, whereas the OTS was going to expire on 18.02.2015. During the subsistence of the OTS dated 18.02.2014, the application filed by the Bank to the District Magistrate, Jalandhar, under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, for grant of police help to take over actual physical possession of the allegedly mortgaged property situated at Jalandhar, was allowed vide order dated 17.06.2014, without even issuing any notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. In the meantime, one of the guarantors with limited liability filed CWP No.1052 of 2015 for release of the property mentioned at Sr. No.4 of the OTS letter on payment. The said writ petition was allowed on 09.04.2015 with the direction to release the property after accepting the agreed price, as mentioned against the property under the OTS letter dated 18.02.2014. The Bank released the property of Sh. Navinder Sharma after accepting the payment of Rs.65 lacs and as such, total amount of Rs.2.30 crores stood paid towards the repayment of loan. It is alleged that after the OTS was cancelled, the Bank tried to enforce the order dated 17.06.2014 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Jalandhar, in respect of the properties situated at Jalandhar. The Bank also took actual physical possession of the factory land and building situated at village Mohal Tibbi, Mouza Kudsan, Tehsil Indora, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, on 27.01.2015 in the absence of the Company and without serving any prior statutory notice but a copy of the possession notice dated 31.02.2015 was issued to the petitioners after the actual physical possession was taken. This led to the filing of CWP No.2627 of 2015, for setting aside the order dated 17.06.2014 and letter dated 09.01.2015, cancelling the OTS and further to release the property of the applicant No.2, described at Sr. No.1 in the order dated 17.06.2014, passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Jalandhar, by accepting Rs.1.45 crores against the value of the property and prayer was also made for a