THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR W.P.No.1994 of 2011 ORDER: (Per Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed, J) This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the Possession Notices, dated 18.12.2010 and 28.12.2010 and consequential notice of sale, dated 30.12.2010 issued by the first respondent-Bank and to quash the same. 2. The brief facts are that the Directors, by name, Sri Pramod Kumar Agarwal and Smt Bhagavathi Bai, of M/s. Jagannatha Strips Ltd., availed several loan facilities from the first respondent from 1986 onwards mortgaging the properties in question and other properties. As the said company sustained huge loss, the Bench of BIFR recommended for winding up on 08.05.1997 and that on 07.06.1997, the Andhra Pradesh State Financial Corporation, Hyderabad, seized the unit of the company, which includes the movable assets hypothecated to the first respondent. Therefore, it filed O.A.No.957 1999 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Bangalore, for certificate of recovery and the same is pending. While so, the first respondent issued notice, dated 18.10.2010, under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘the Act’) and possession notices, dated 18.12.2010 and 28.12.2010 under Section 13(4) of the Act and consequential notice of sale, dated 30.12.2010, to the said company. The petitioners, who are the son and the sister of Sri Pramod Kumar Agarwal, are claiming ownership over the schedule properties mentioned in the notices impugned and filed S.A.IR No.10 of 2011 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai (for short ‘the Tribunal’) along with IAIR No.26 of 2011 seeking stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the notices impugned. The said IAIR was dismissed on 31.01.2011. The petitioners filed the present writ petition challenging the possession and sale notices. 3. The first respondent Bank filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioners being the son and the sister of one of the Directors of the above said Company, have colluded with the mortgagors of the Bank and created false documents as if they are the owners of the properties in question. It is stated that the petitioners being third parties to the loan and the mortgaged transactions have no locus standi to challenge the action of the Bank in issuing the notices impugned. 4. The petitioners filed a rejoinder reiterating the averments made in the writ petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent Bank. 6. This Court, while admitting the writ petition on 02.02.2001, passed an interim order granting liberty to the first respondent to proceed with the auction as per the schedule, but not to confirm the sale and the said order is being extended from time to time. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that as the properties brought to sale are belongs to the petitioners, the notices impugned are liable to be set aside. 8. The learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent-Bank reiterated the averments made in the counter-affidavit and contended that the documents pertaining to the properties in question are all created by the petitioners to stall the recovery proceedings. He submitted that the properties were already sold as per the interim orders of this Court. 9. In view of the above submissions, it appears that by virtue of the interim order passed by this Court on 02.02.2011, the first respondent-Bank sold the properties in question without confirming the sale. SAIR No.10 of 2011 filed by the petitioners against the very same notices impugned is pending adjudication before the Tribunal. In view of the controversy between the parties as regards the properties in question, and since the matter with regard to the notices impugned is pending before the Tribunal, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition at this stage. Therefore, without expressing any opinion, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Tribunal to dispose of S.A.I.R.No.10 of 2011, expeditiously, within a period of four weeks from today. Till such time, the interim order passed by this Court shall operate. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _______________ K.G.SHANKAR , J Date:01.03.2011 Note: Issue CC within three days. (Bo) sj