IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.1335 of 2009 Date of Decision : December 20, 2010. M/s J.S.Feeds and another .....Petitioners versus Central Bank of India and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Nitin Jain, Advocate, for Mr.C.B.Goel, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.C.S.Pasricha, Advocate, for the respondents. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioners challenge the action taken by the respondent- bank under Section 13 (4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 2002 Act'). In the light of the recent Supreme Court decision dated 26.7.2010 in Civil Appeal No.5990 of 2010 (United Bank of India versus Satyawati Tondon and others), the writ petition is disposed of by relegating the petitioners to the alternative remedy to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal. It is clarified that in case the petitioners file an Application/Appeal within a period of one month from the date of C.W.P.No .1335 of 2009 2 receiving a certified copy of this order, the counsel for the respondent- bank undertakes not to take any objection of limitation and the Tribunal is accordingly directed to decide the issues on merits, as early as possible and preferably within a period of six months from the date of filing such an Application/Appeal. Ordered accordingly. The interim order dated 28.1.2009 shall continue to operate for a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order and thereafter, the petitioners may seek its extension from the Tribunal, subject to the terms and conditions that may be imposed by the Tribunal. Dasti. December 20, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE