1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Writ Petition No.4233/2008 M/s. Shree Properties Vs. The Union of India and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Mr. A.P. Tathod, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Dastane, Advocate for respondent nos. 2 to 4. Coram : B.H. Marlapalle and A.H. Joshi, JJ. Dated : 23rd October, 2008. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2 Admittedly, pursuant to the notice passed under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, “the Securitization Act”) a public notice has been published by the said respondent for the auction sale of the petitioner's property which was hypothecated in favour of respondent no.2-bank. The petitioner did not challenge the said order passed under Section 13(4) of the Securitization Act by filing an appeal under Section 17 of the Securitization Act before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The petitioner waited for the public notice 2 for auction-sale to be published and has approached this Court solely on the ground that the Notification issued by the Government of India through Ministry of Finance on 28.1.2003 is a subject matter of challenge before the Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) 17573/2007 It is required to be noted that the Notification dated 28.1.2003 was a subject matter of challenge before this Court and the Notification was up-held by the Aurangabad Bench. The said order is under challenge in SLP (Civil)No.17573/2007 and by way of the interim order the Apex Court was pleased to continue the stay granted by the Aurangabad Bench of this Court. The petitioner has an alternate remedy of filing an appeal against the order passed under Section 13(4)of the Securitization Act, before the Debts Recovery Tribunal and when such a statutory remedy is available, a writ petition cannot be entertained solely on the ground that the judgment rendered by this Court is a subject matter of challenge before the Apex Court. Hence, the petition is disposed off with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal, by way of an appeal. If such an appeal is filed within a period of four weeks from today, the 3 period of pendency of this petition from 23.9.2008 onwards shall be taken into consideration for condonation of delay, if any, caused in filing the appeal. We make it clear that the application for injunction/interim relief to be filed in such an appeal will be decided by the Tribunal, on its own merits, and without being influenced by the order of status quo granted by this Court. JUDGE JUDGE Ambulkar.