1 wp-9176-10.sxw dgm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9176 OF 2010 M/s. Pritam Wines .... Petitioner vs Bank of Maharashtra .... Respondent Mr. Uday P. Warunjikar for the petitioner. Mr. Rakesh Sihngh for respondent. CORAM: DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE : December 01, 2010 P.C.: The Respondent issued notices under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 on 14 June 2008.The notice under Section 13(4) was issued on 16 December 2008. Thereafter a sale notice was issued on 16 October 2010 for the sale of shops 11 and 12, Sai Plaza, Plot No.238, Old Panvel. It is at that stage that the petitioner had moved this Court. The petition came up before this Court on 25 November 2010, when the Respondent handed over a statement to the petitioner, according to which, an amount of Rs.21.31 lacs was stated to be due and payable by the petitioner. The parties made an effort to resolve the dispute amicably, but the Court is now informed that no settlement is possible. The petitioner would, in these circumstances, have to be relegated to the remedy provided by Section 17 of 2 wp-9176-10.sxw moving the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The sale was conducted by the Respondent/Bank during the pendency of the proceedings before this Court. The sale has not still been confirmed. We are of the view that the ends of justice would require the passing of a protective order for a limited duration to enable the petitioner to move the Debts Recovery Tribunal. This, however, would be subject to a condition of deposit. 2 We direct that in the event the petitioner deposits an amount of Rs.5 lacs before the Debts Recovery Tribunal on or before 3 December 2010, the Respondent shall not confirm the sale for a period of two weeks from today. Within the aforesaid period of two weeks, it will be open to the petitioner to move an application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17. The Debts Recovery Tribunal shall consider and deal with the application thereafter and it would be open to the Tribunal to pass such orders as it thinks proper in furtherance to or in variation of the aforesaid order, which shall hold the field for a period of two weeks from today or until the Tribunal passes an order whichever is earlier. In the event, the petitioner fails to effect the deposit, it will be open to the Respondent to confirm the sale and to take necessary steps in accordance with law. 3 The petition is disposed of in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) ( DR.D. Y. CHANDRACHUD,J.)