IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.22956 of 2010 Date of Decision : December 22, 2010. M/s Duhan Farms .....Petitioner versus Bank of India and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 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 petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondent- bank taken under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 2002 Act'), allegedly without resorting to the mandatory procedure laid down under Section 13 of the Act. In my considered view, if the respondent-bank has proceeded against the petitioner in violation of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court ini Mardia Chemicals Limited and others versus Union of India and others, (2004 (4) SCC 311, the petitioner would be well within its rights to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act. C.W.P.No .22956 of 2010 2 The writ petition is accordingly disposed of by relegating the petitioner to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal. It is directed that in case the petitioner approaches the Tribunal and seeks interim relief on some reasonable terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Tribunal, such an application shall be decided by the Tribunal within a period of two weeks from the date of its filing. Subject to the petitioner's depositing a sum of Rs.10 lacs, its dispossession shall remain stayed for a period of two weeks. Dasti. December 22, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE