Hon’ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal, J.—Heard Shri Satyendra Chandra Tripathi learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Ankit Saran learned Advocate appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Shri U.N. Khare for auction purchaser-respondent No. 4. Learned Standing Counsel appears for respondent No. 3. The respondent No. 5 is the wife of petitioner, who is stated to be owner of the disputed property which has been mortgaged with the bank and will be mentioned as the ‘secured asset’ hereinafter.

2. The present petition is directed against the order dated 7.6.2018 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad as well as the order dated 9.2.2016 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal Allahabad in the Securitisation Application No. 240 of 2014 (Sanjeev Kumar Porwal v. State Bank of India, Jalaun and others). The order dated 24.9.2016 passed by the District Magistrate, Jalaun namely respondent No. 3 is also being challenged in the present petition.

3. Brief facts relevant to decide the controversy are that the petitioner namely Sanjeev Kumar Porwal, the Proprietor of ‘M/s Maa Vaishno Traders, Naveen Galla Mandi, Jalaun, had taken a cash credit limit facility to the tune of Rs. 20