(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

Petitioner has impugned an order dated 25.10.2019 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal on various grounds. Petitioner, who was a guarantor for a loan that was availed by respondent No.2 from State Bank of India, respondent No.1, sought restitution of property from Debts Recovery Tribunal alleging that the sale was irregular and the question of third respondent being a bona fide purchaser did not arise. According to petitioner, the property has been sold at a price much lower than what the valuation was around the date of sale and if only petitioner was given an opportunity to redeem at the sale price, petitioner would have redeemed the property.

2. Respondent No.2 had availed credit facilities from Respondent No.1 bank in the y