KRISHNA KUMAR Vs. SUREPALLY MANOHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners, who are auction purchasers in an auction conducted by the Recovery Officer of property belonging to the 1st respondent which had been mortgaged to the 2nd respondentBank, have filed this Writ Petition assailing the order dt.05.07.2019 in SA.No.1409 of 2017 of Debt Recovery Tribunal-II at Hyderabad(for short 'the Tribunal') setting aside the Sale Certificate issued to them.

(2.) The only ground on which the Sale Certificate was set aside in the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is that there was no affixture on the property of the e-auction Sale Notice dt.19.07.2017.

(3.) It was the finding of the Tribunal that there was no response from the 2nd respondent-Bank to this ground raised by the 1st respondent before it. It opined that under Rule 8(7) of the Rules framed under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 such affixture is mandatory and since there is non-compliance with it, the eauction Sale stood vitiated.