Having heard the parties and after going through the entire documents available on the records, I find that this Application has been filed by the third party who has alleged that he has approached the 2nd Defendant for the purchase of the 7th Schedule property, which is mentioned in the Impugned E-Auction Notice dated 01.02.2023 issued under Rule 8(6) of the SARFAESI Act 2002 by the Defendant Bank and made payment of Rs. 12,00,000/- out of total sale consideration of Rs. 1,25,00,000/- to the loan account of the 2nd Defendant. The 2nd Defendant’s wife Rekha Prakashkumar executed a sale agreement for such advance amount in favour of the Applicant (Page nos. 7 to 11 of Applicant’s main SA). However, I find that the Sale Agreement filed by the Applicant is not the registered one hence it cannot be considered. And this agreement was executed just before issuance of one month of Sale Notice i.e. after classifying the account as NPA and after issuance of Demand Notice and Possession Notice. So, it is not sustainable under the eye of law. Further, the agreement is only between the Applicant and the borrower and an agreement will not confer any right or title over the property. Since the Petitioner does not have any right or privity of contract, he has to work out his remedy in the manner known to law.
