sum of Rs.10,20,000/- on 27/02/2008 through cheque shows that he has not paid the 25% of the sale consideration on the date of sale or next date. Again, it was found that Mr.K.R.Sridharan, was the successful bidder, but the sale certificate was issued in favour the third respondent namely P.Gunasekaran. It is required that sale certificate should be issued in favour of the successful bidder on his payment of entire sale price. SARFAESI Act does not permit issuance of sale certificate in favour of the third party, who has not bid in the auction and succeeded. Therefore, this Tribunal finds that when measures taken for taking possession of the property and the sale are not in consonance with the mandatory provisions of the SARFAESI Act, they are liable to be set aside. The learned Presiding Officer, DRT-I, Chennai, considered the every aspect of the dispute extensively and allowed the application. Thus, this Tribunal finds that there is no need for interfering with the finding of the learned Presiding Officer, DRT-I, Chennai. Thus, the order of the learned Presiding Officer , DRT-I, Chennai, in S.A.169/2008 is confirmed and this appeal is dismissed.
