possession of the schedule property to the auction purchaser. In view of the same, the lstRespondent Bank approached Ld.CJM, Nizamabad by filing Cr1.M.P.No.72l2024 for appointment of advocate commissioner and the Ld.CJM was pleased to appoint advocate commissioner for taking physical possession of the schedule property. Even as per the documents filed by the Applicants, it is clear that the advocate commissioner issued notice to the Applicants directing them to vacate the schedule. property on 27.O2.2O24. The Applicants instead of vacating the schedule premises, Iiled the present SA contending that they cannot be evicted from theschedule propert5r. But the Applicants who are claiming to be tenants of the schedule property under the unregistered lease agreements, cannot get any protection whenthe lstRespondent Bank has initiated proceedings under the provisions of SARFAESI Act,2OO2 and Rules made thereunder for taking physical possession of the schedule propert5r which is mortgaged in favour of the l"t Respondent Bank by the 2"d Respondent in security of the loan availed by her. So in the circumstances, I hold that the Applicants who are claiming as tenants of the schedule property, are not entitled to challenge the proceedingsinitiated by the lst Respondent Bank for taking physical possession of the schedule property. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of the l"tRespondent Bank and against the Applicants.
