ORDER:

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice C.Praveen Kumar)

1) Heard both sides and perused the record.

2) The present Writ Petition came to be filed seeking issuance of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not registering the property i.e. land and commercial shed bearing Door No.4-1948/6 in Sy.No.194/5A admeasuring 3788 Sq. feet situated at T.S.No.71, Durga Nagar Colony. D-Block, Park Street, Greamspet Revenue village, Chittoor in favour of auction purchaser, pursuant to the auction conducted on 03.03.2020, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the „SARFAESI Act‟).

3) The circumstances, which lead to filing of the present writ petition are as under:

(i) The 5th respondent herein offered the premises i.e. land and commercial shed bearing Door No.4-1948/6 in Sy.No.194/5A admeasuring 3788 Sq. feet situated at T.S.No.71, Durga Nagar Colony. D-Block, Park Street, Greamspet Revenue village, Chittoor, as security to the petitioner-Bank for repayment of various credit facilities sanctioned to his wife M.Usha Rani, Proprietor of M/s. Usha Broilers.

4) It is stated that the Proprietor of M/s. Usha Broilers availed credit facilities from the Petitioner Bank and as security for repayment, the 5th respondent deposited registered sale deed of the property referred to above and also connected documents in respect of the said property and created mortgage over the said property. The 3rd respondent also confirmed the creation of the mortgage vide registered memorandum of deposit of title deed No.1718 of 2016 dated 02.04.2016, which came to be registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Chittoor.

5) As the Proprietor of M/s. Usha Broilers committed default in payment of dues, in accordance with the agreed terms, the account of M/s. Usha Broilers was classified as NPA and accordingly, the procedure under SARFAESI Act was invoked for recovery of the amount. Section 13(2) notice and also a sale notice fixing the date of auction on 03.03.2020 were issued and the bid was knocked down at Rs.44,00,000/- in favour of one Mr.D.Yugandhar. The sale was confirmed in favour of the auction purchaser and he has deposited the entire sale proceeds.

6) The petitioner-Bank approached the 3rd respondent for registration of the auctioned property in favour of the auction purchaser i.e. one D.Yugandhar. But the 3rd respondent refused to register the property on the ground that the 4th respondent obtained attachment order dated 06.01.2018 vide Dispute No.DRB-1/FZ/CFS/70/2017-2018 from the Deputy Registrar of Chits, First Zone, Malleshwaram at Bangalore, against the subject property and property was included in prohibitory list.

7) Challenging the inaction on the part of the 3rd respondent, present writ petition came to be filed.

8) Mr.C.Subodh, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue involved in the case is no more res integra and is covered by the orders passed by this Court. Referring Sections 26(E) and 34 of the SARFAESI Act, he would submit that the 3rd respondent cannot refuse to register the sale certificate. It is further stated that the 4th respondent is not secured creditor and the order of attachment by the Deputy Registrar of Chits came to be passed on 06.01.2018 while the date of hypothecation / mortgage was much prior i.e. on 02.04.2016. Having regard to the above, he pleads that the action of the 3rd respondent is illegal and incorrect.

9) Learned Government Pleader for Revenue opposed the same, but however, does not dispute the law laid down in catena of judgments.

10) When the mortgage of the property is much prior to the order of attachment passed by any authority or civil Court, the first charge could be with the Bank for recovery of the amount due.

11) In the instant case, the mortgage of the property for the loan taken by the borrower was on 02.04.2016 and the order of attachment came to