APHC010374602024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 19059 of 2024 [3446] Balaji Agrichem ...Petitioner Vs. the Indian Bank ...Respondent ********** Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. C Subodh Advocate for Respondent: Mr. Ambatipudi Satyanarayana, Senior Counsel appearing vice Mr. Sreedhar Valiveti CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO RESERVED ON : PRONOUNCED ON : 24.07.2025 16.10.2025 Per DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ: The petitioner had borrowed certain sums of money from the respondent – the Indian Bank and on account of its failure to repay, its account was classified as Non-Performing Asset, which was followed by a notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ―the Act‖). 2 HCJ & RRR, J W.P. No: 19059 of 2024 Thereafter, a notice of sale under Rule 8(6) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ―the Rules‖) was issued on 06.08.2024, which also intimated the petitioner that the secured properties would be sold any time after 30 days. The Bank also published auction notice under Rule 9(1) of the Rules in the newspapers on 09.08.2024, fixing the date of auction as on 11.09.2024. 2. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that even after the amendment of Section 13(8) of the Act, a secured creditor was bound to afford to the borrower a clear 30 days notice period under Rule 8(6) to enable him to exercise his right to redemption and that a clear 30 day period had to be maintained between the issuance of the sale notice under Rule 8(6) and the publication of the sale notice under Rule 9(1) of the Rules. 3. Reliance in this regard was placed upon a Division Bench judgment of the combined High Court of Andhra Pradesh passed in W.P. No.8155 of 2018, decided on 27.06.2018, which, in similar circumstances, had set aside the auction notice by holding that 30 day notice period was not maintained between the notice under Rule 8(6) and the publication of the auction sale notice in newspapers under Rule 9(1) of the Rules. 4. At this stage, it is deemed appropriate to refer to some of the provisions of the Act and the Rules prior to the amendment and after the amendment. 3 HCJ & RRR, J W.P. No: 19059 of 2024 Prior to the amendment, Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act reads as under : ―13(8). If the dues of the secured creditor together with all costs, charges and expenses incurred by him are tendered to the secured creditor at any time before the date fixed for sale or transfer, the secured asset shall not be sold or transferred by the secured creditor, and no further step shall be taken by him for transfer or sale of that secured asset.‖ After its amendment with effect from 01.09.2016, Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act reads as under: ―13(8). Where the amount of dues of the secured creditor together with all costs, charges and expenses incurred by him is tendered to the secured creditor at any time before the date of publication of notice for public auction or inviting quotations or tender from public or private treaty for transfer by way of lease, assignment or sale of the secured assets,— (i) the secured assets shall not be transferred by way of lease, assignment or sale by the secured creditor; and (ii) in case, any step has been taken by the secured creditor for transfer by way of lease or assignment or sale of the assets before tendering of such amount under this sub-section, no further step shall be taken by such secured creditor for transfer by way of lease or assignment or sale of such secured assets.‖ Prior to its amendment, Rule 8(6) reads as under: ―8(6). The authorized officer shall serve to the borrower a notice of thirty days for sale of the immovable secured assets, under sub-rule (5). Provided that if the sale of such secured asset is being effected by either inviting tenders from the public or by holding public auction, the secured creditor shall cause a public notice in two leading newspapers one in vernacular language having sufficient circulation in the locality by setting out the terms of sale, which shall include,— (a) the description of the immovable property to be sold, including the details of the encumbrances known to the secured creditor; (b) the secured debt for recovery of which the property is to be sold; (c) reserve price, below which the property may not be sold; (d) time and place of public auction or the time after which sale by any other mode shall be completed; (e) depositing earnest money as may stipulated by the secured creditor; (f) any other thing which the authorised officer considers it material for a purchaser to know in order to judge the nature and value of the property.‖ After the amendment in 2018, Rule 8(6) reads thus: ―(6) the authorised officer shall serve to the borrower a notice of thirty days for sale of the immovable secured assets, under sub-rule (5): 4 HCJ & RRR, J W.P. No: 19059 of 2024 Provided that if the sale of such secured asset is being effected by either inviting tenders from the public or by holding public auction, the secured creditor shall cause a public notice in the Form given in Appendix IV-A to be published in two leading newspapers including one in vernacular language having wide circulation in the locality.‖ Prior to its amendment, Rule 9(1) reads as under: ―9(1). No sale of immovable property under these rules shall take place before the expiry of thirty days from the date on which the public notice of sale is published in newspapers as referred to in the proviso to sub-rule (6) or notice of sale has been served to the borrower.‖ After the amendment, Rule 9(1) reads as under: ―9(1). No sale of immovable property under these rules, in first instance shall take place before the expiry of thirty days from the date on which the public notice of sale is published in newspapers as referred to in the proviso to sub-rule (6) of rule 8 or notice of sale has been served to the borrower. Provided further that if sale of immovable property by any one of the methods specified by sub-rule (5) of rule 8 fails and sale is required to be conducted again, the authorized officer shall serve, affix and publish notice of sale of not less than fifteen days to the borrower, for any subsequent sale.‖ 5. The issue of whether there ought to have been a 30 day time gap between the date of issuance of a notice of sale to the borrower and the issuance of the auction notice in fact is no longer res integra, as our attention has been drawn to recent judgment of the Apex Court in M. Rajendran v. KPK Oils & Protiens India (P) Ltd1 where the Apex Court, after considering the provision of the SARFAESI Act and the Rules before amendment and after amendment as reproduced hereinabove, came to a conclusion that the scheme formed by Rule 8(6), the proviso thereto, Rule 8(7) and Rule 9(1) 1 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2036 5 HCJ & RRR, J W.P. No: 19059 of 2024 speak only of a single composite notice of sale and that the difference is only in the manner in which such notice of sale is effected and given. It was held thus: ―156. In the entire gamut of the scheme formed by Rule(s) 8(6), the Proviso thereto, 8(7) and 9(1) respectively, all speak of only one single composite notice of sale, the only difference between these provisions, is the manner in which such notice of sale is to be effectuated and given. Rule 8(6) speaks of serving a thirty days' notice of sale to borrower. On the other hand, where the public is sought to be involved in the sale process, either by auction or by inviting tender, then thesame notice of sale has to be published in the newspaper. As per Rule 8 (7), apart from serving the notice of sale and/or causing it in a newspaper, as the case may be, the selfsame notice of sale has to also be affixed on the conspicuous part of the immovable secured asset and also uploaded on the website of the secured creditor. 157. Thus, it can be seen from the above, that Rule 8(6) and the Proviso appended to it, Rule 8(7) and Rule 9(1) of the SARFAESI Rules respectively, all speak of only one single notice of sale. The distinction lies only in the manner in which it is to be given, inasmuch as under Rule(s) 8(6), Proviso thereto, 8(7) and 9(1) respectively, the same notice is required to be served to the borrower, published in the newspaper, affixed on the secured asset & uploaded on the website, and maintain a 30-day gap from the date of actual sale, respectively. Despite the variance in the manner in which the notice of sale is to be given or effectuated under the aforesaid rules, it nevertheless continues to be one single composite notice only.‖ Finally, in para No.169, the following conclusions were drawn: ―169. From the above discussion, we have no hesitation in holding the following:— (i) Rule(s) 8(6), the Proviso thereto, Rule 8(7) and Rule 9(1) of the SARFAESI Rules respectively do not speak of any separate or distinct notice of sale that is required to be issued by the secured creditor for the transfer of the secured asset by way of lease, assignment or sale in accordance with any of the methods enumerated in Rule 8(5). (ii) The different manner in which the notice of sale has to be served, caused, published, affixed, uploaded as stipulated in Rule (s) 8(6) and 8(7) of the SARFAESI Rules respectively, do not constitute separate notices of sale by themselves. They are part and parcel of one single composite intended ―notice of sale‖ of the secured asset by the secured creditor, by any of the mode of sale listed in Rule 8(5). All of the aforesaid rules are concerned with a single composite ―notice of sale‖, and the only distinction between the said rules, is the manner in which the said ―notice of sale‖ has to be given, on the basis of which the relevant rule or rules are applicable, as the case may be. (iii) Similarly, the stipulation under Rule 9(1) of a thirty-day gap between the date of 6 HCJ & RRR, J W.P. No: 19059 of 2024 publication of notice of sale and the date of actual sale does not impute a distinct characteristic to the public notice in the newspaper in contrast to the notice of sale that is served to the borrower. As is evident from Appendix IV-A to the SARFAESI Rules, the public notice of sale in newspaper as-well the notice of sale served to the borrower are one and the same, for the purpose of Rule 9(1). (iv) The embargo enshrined under Rule 9(1), that no sale, in the first instance shall take place before the expiry of thirty-days, would be reckoned from the date of issuance of the ―notice of sale‖, which would include both the public notice of sale in the newspaper and the service thereof to the borrower, whichever is‖ 6. In view of the clear ratio of the judgment supra, we find that there is no merit in the present petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO,J akn 7 HCJ & RRR, J W.P. No: 19059 of 2024 HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO Writ Petition No: 19059 of 2024 DATE : 16.10.2025 AKN