IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.15709 of 2010 Date of Decision : September 08, 2010. Arvindpal Singh .....Petitioner versus Punjab & Sind Bank .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Veneet Sharma, 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) Apprehending his forcible dispossession as a result of the action taken under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security and Interest Act, 2002 (for short `the Act'), the petitioner seeks quashing of the notice dated 19.7.2010 (Annexure P-1) issued under Section 13 (2) of the Act. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the considered view that at this stage, the petitioner would be at liberty to submit his objections against the above mentioned notice, which the respondent-bank is obligated to consider in accordance with law. If any further punitive action is taken against the petitioner, he shall be at liberty to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal, as ruled by the Hon'ble Supreme C.W.P.No .15709 of 2010 2 Court in a recent decision dated 26.7.2010 in Civil Appeal No.5990 of 2010 (United Bank of India vesus Satyawati Tondon and others). However, the petitioner, as averred in this writ petition, if willing to pay the loan amount in instalments, may submit such a proposal which the respondent-bank may consider sympathetically. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. Dasti. September 08, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE