1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 6082/2010 (Anil Rambhau Vairagade .vs. Authorized Officer, Indian Overseas Bank and ors. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATED : JUNE 08, 2011 Heard Advocate Shri R.R. Poharkar for petitioner, Advocate Smt. Naik for respondent no.1 and Government Pleader Shri N.W. Sambre for respondents no.2 and 3. Challenge is to the order dated 9.6.2010 for possession passed by respondent no.2 under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Shri Poharkar contends that petitioner is a tenant in possession since last more than 50 years and hence he cannot be dispossessed by taking recourse to Section 13 of the Act. In the alternative and without prejudice he also invites attention to the facts that twice respondent no.1 Bank has attempted to auction the property but as there were no buyers, the auction could not take place. He also invites attention to proposal dated 9.12.2010 submitted by the petitioner and contends that respondent no.1 should at least consider that proposal. 2 Advocate Smt. Naik for respondent no.1 states that the petitioner has no ready money with him and, therefore, he is trying to prolong the litigation. She contends that respondent no.1 Bank is entitled to recover possession. Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents no.2 and 3 states that orders passed by respondent no.2 are in accordance with law. This Court has on 23.12.2010 has already protected the possession of the petitioner. Accordingly the petitioner till today is in possession of the property. The Act provides remedy of appeal to petitioner. Hence we grant him time of four weeks to prefer that appeal before the competent authority in accordance with the law. Till then the interim order dated 23.12.2010 passed by this Court to continue. With this liberty, the present petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE halwai