IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6333 of 2011 ----------- Asharfi Lal, son of late Saukhi Lal resident of village/Mohalla Kamla Nehru Nagar, P.S. Kotwali, District Patna. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The General Manager, State Bank of India, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Road Point, Mumbai-400021, 2. The Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Resolution Centre 2nd Floor, Patna Main Branch Building, Gandhi Maidan, Patna. 3. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Ashiana Nagar Branch, Patna. … Respondents ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. K. N. Diwakar, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Mukundji, Advocate ----- 02/ 18.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging possession notice bearing no. SARB/PKD/2767 dated 17.02.2011 issued by the respondents under the provision of section 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act’) although according to the petitioner he has fair intention to repay the loan taken by him and he is even continuing to make the said payment. 3. From the facts and circumstances of the case as well as from the materials on record, it is quite apparent that against such an order a proper adequate and efficacious remedy of appeal is provided under section 17 of the Act, hence there is no occasion for this Court to continue with this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ 2 petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under section 17 of the Act. If such an appeal is filed within fifteen days from today along with a copy of this order and an interlocutory application for condoning the delay, the said authority shall consider the delay caused in the appeal due to the pendency of this writ petition and shall decide the same on merits expeditiously in accordance with law. If the petitioner wants an interim order, he will be at liberty to file an interlocutory application for the said purpose which the said authority shall also decide in accordance with law. MPS/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )