Point of Law :
As per Rule 9 (5) of the Rules, in default of payment within the period mentioned in sub-rule (4), the deposit shall be forfeited to the secured creditor and the property shall be resold, and the defaulting purchaser shall forfeit all claim to the property or to any part of the sum for which it may be subsequently sold.

ORDER :

K. LAKSHMAN, J.

1. Assailing the order dated 29.07.2019 of the Debts Recovery Tribunal - I, Hyderabad, in S.A. No.322 of 2015, the petitioner - auction purchaser, filed the present writ petition.

2. The main contentions of the writ petitioner are that she is the successful bidder in the auction conducted by respondent No.5 - State Bank of India, Hyderguda, Hyderabad on 27.03.2015, pursuant to e-auction sale, dated 24.02.2015, in respect of properties bearing (i) House Number 1-4-888/B/A to an extent of 130 square yards for Rs.31,45,000/-, (ii) House Number 1-4-882/5/A to an extent of 31 square yards for an amount of Rs.7,15,000/-, (iii) House Number 1-4-888/B to an extent of 258 square yards for an amount of Rs.74,40,000/- and (iv) House Number 1-4-882/5 to an extent of 160 square yards for an amount of Rs.38,60,000/-, all situated at Bakaram, Hyderabad. In all she has paid an amount of Rs.1,51,60,000/- and got the sale certificates registered in her favour later vide document Nos.1979 of 2015 to 1982 of 2015, dated 23.05.2015.

(i) According to the petitioner, respondent No.1 herein availed a loan from respondent No.5 bank in the year 2009 and respondent Nos.2 to 4 offered their properties as security. Since there was default in repayment of the loan, their account was declared as Non- Performing Asset. Subsequently, respondent No.5 bank had issued notice on 01.03.2014 under Section 13 (2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SARFAESI Act’) followed by possession notice on 08.10.2014 under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act read with Rule 8 (1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 (for short ‘Rules’). Respondent No.5 got published the possession notice in two leading Newspapers viz., ‘Indian Express’ and ‘Andhra Prabha’ on 10.10.2014 as contemplated under Rule 8 (2) of the Rules, 2002. But, there was no response from respondent Nos.1 to 4 despite receiving and acknowledging the said notices. Respondent No.5 issued sale notice dated 14.11.2014 claiming outstanding dues of Rs.1,71,38,575/- together with interest, expenses and costs.

3. It is the further contention of the petitioner that respondent No.5 issued e-auction sale notice dated 24.02.2015 as contemplated under the SARFAESI Act intimating respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein about the auction to be held on 27.03.2015 in respect of the mortgaged assets. According to her, the said e-auction sale notices dated 24.02.2015 were served on respondent Nos.1 to 4 and the same were affixed on the premises/conspicuous part of the mortgaged properties, and also taken photographs to that effect. The Authorized Officer of the Bank has also got published the e-auction sale notice dated 24.02.2015 in two leading Newspapers i.e., ‘Indian Express’ and ‘Rahnuma-e-Deccan’ on 24.02.2015 itself informing that the auction would be held on 27.03.2015. The details of properties, minimum upset price of the auction etc., were mentioned in the said e-auction notice dated 24.02.2015. Accordingly, auction was held on 27.03.2015, wherein the petitioner herein was declared as highest bidder. The petitioner also paid an amount of Rs.1,51,60,000/- within the time frame contemplated under the Rules. On receipt of the said sum, respondent No.5 bank confirmed the sale, issued the sale certificates in favour of the petitioner and got the same registered in favour of the petitioner vide document Nos.1979 of 2015 to 1982 of 2015, dated 23.05.2015. After purchase, she has invested an amount of Rs.20.00 lakhs on the said properties for repairs/remodelling, and since the date of purchase and registration of sale certificates, she has been in continuous possession of the said properties.

4. According to her, respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein have allowed respondent No.5 herein to complete the entire process and conveniently approached the DRT-I, Hyderabad by way of filing an application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act vide S