of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. The contention of the applicants that the property is an agricultural land is specifically denied by the respondent. It is also stated that the property was put to sale on 08.12.2016 and said sale was not gone through for want of bidders. In the meanwhile, the applicants had made remittances of Rs.1,30,000/- as against the book balance of Rs.52,22,742.80. A fresh sale to be conducted on 30.03.2017 was notified. By two remittances on 27.03.2017 and 28.03.2017 an amount of Rs.4,75,000/- was paid and pursuant to the said request bank had not gone ahead with the sale scheduled on 30.03.2017. Since no payment as assured as come through again fresh notification dt.07.03.2019 was also published notifying the sale on 10.04.2019 which was followed by another sale notice dt.15.10.2019. In the meanwhile, the applicants were also informed as to the readiness of the bank to consider sincere compromise proposal, if any. As no compromise was arrived as assured, a fresh sale notice was issued on 11.01.2020 fixing the sale on 16.03.2020. The applicants were duly served with the notices apart from service through paper publication. It is also stated that the property in question was sold to Ms.Asmath Beevi and Mr.Sandeep for a sum of Rs.70,40,000/- and sale certificate was also issued as early as on 29.07.2020. Since the purchasers had sought for delivery of possession an application was moved before Ld. Magistrate which was challenged by the applicants in SA 408/2021. It is also contended that the SA is bad for non-jointer of
