Both writ petitions are filed by the same person, who is defaulter for the loan availed from the 1st respondent Bank. Even though the liability is above Rs. 18 lakhs, petitioner's property was sold for Rs. 2 lakhs on 16/11/2006. Second respondent purchased the property and got the Kudiyidappu shifted on payment of compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs. According to the second respondent he has already made investment of around Rs. 1 lakh in the property and he is given delivery of the property in April 2007. However, it is seen that petitioner had challenged the sale by filing WP(C) No. 3811/2007 on 02/02/2007 itself. Since the property is above one acre of land and the sale price is only Rs. 2 lakhs, I feel, sale should be interfered with not only in the interest of the petitioner but to protect the interest of the 1st respondent Bank, which is to recover a further sum of Rs. 16 lakhs towards balance loan from the very same petitioner. Simultaneously 2nd respondent is entitled to compensation besides refund of purchase price paid. In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing
