C.W.P NO. 21731 OF 2008(O & M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P NO. 21731 OF 2008(O & M) DECIDED ON : 27.04.2009 M/S S.K Satpal and others ...Petitioners versus Union of India and another ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT Present : Mr. L. M. Gulati, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. R. S. Bhatia, Advocate, for the respondents. SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) The petitioners seek quashing of the impugned notice dated 15.12.2008 issued under Section 13 (2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. When the matter came up for hearing before this Court on December 24, 2008, the following order was passed in the light of the stand taken by the petitioners: “ Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are willing to pay the entire amount as demanded by the Bank in 12 equal monthly instalments starting from Ist February, 2009. C.W.P NO. 21731 OF 2008(O & M) -2- Normally, there can be no interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution when a statutory appeal is provided against proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, in view of undertaking given by learned counsel for the petitioners that they will pay the entire amount as demanded with contractual rate of interest, we issue notice to ascertain the stand of respondent No.2. Notice of motion to respondent No.2 for 14.07.2009. In the meanwhile, there will be stay of coercive steps against the property of the petitioners, subject to petitioners complying with the undertaking to pay the amount demanded in equal monthly instalments commencing from 01.02.2009”. The respondent-Bank has now moved an application for vacation of the above reproduced order on the ground that the petitioners have failed to deposit the agreed monthly installments for the months of February, March as well as April, 2009. C.W.P NO. 21731 OF 2008(O & M) -3- In the light of the fact that the petitioners have failed to honour their own undertaking, the hearing in the main case is pre-poned for today and is dismissed. C.M also stands disposed of. APRIL 27, 2009 (SURYA KANT) shalini JUDGE