IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 319 of 2010 Date of Decision: 19.1.2010 Jaspal Singh and another ....Petitioners. Versus PNB Housing Finance Ltd. and another ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. M.K. Bhatnagar, Advocate for the petitioners. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. In the instant writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have impugned possession notice dated 8.12.2009 (Annexure P-4) issued under Section 13 (4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). Section 17 (1) of the Act provides for right of appeal to any aggrieved person against any of the measures referred to in Section 13 (4) taken by the secured creditor or his authorized officer. Section 17 (1) of the Act reads thus:- “17. Right to appeal.- (1) Any person including borrower, aggrieved by any of the measures referred to in sub-section (4) of section 13 taken by the secured creditor or his authorised officer under this Chapter, may make an application along with such fee, as may be prescribed to the Debts Recovery CWP No. 319 of 2010 -2- Tribunal having jurisdiction in the matter within forty- five days from the date on which such measures had been taken: Provided that different fees may be prescribed for making the application by the borrower and the person other than the borrower. (2) to (7) XX XX XX” After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the file, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the writ petition is disposed of by relegating the petitioners to avail of the alternative remedy by filing an appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, in accordance with law. January 19, 2010 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE