IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.6553 of 2009 Date of Decision : December 01, 2010. Suresh Kumar .....Petitioner versus The State Bank of India and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.C.B.Goel, Advocate, for respondent No.1-Bank. Mr.Ashwani Talwar, Advocate, for respondent No.3. Mr.Manish Jain, Advocate, for the Intervenor-firm. -.- 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) Though it appears, prima-facie, that the petitioner has been deprived of the property jointly owned by him with the borrower(s), by the bank officials in connivance with the auction purchaser, however, this Court need not to go into this question or express its final view at this stage for the reason that the petitioner has already approached the Debt Recovery Tribunal by filing S.A.No.87 of 2008. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to raise all the contentions before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, who in turn, shall be required to return its findings on these issues. C.W.P.No .6553 of 2009 2 Till the matter is finally decided by the Tribunal, the Auction Purchaser is restrained from creating any type of encumbrance or third party rights in the property in question. The Tribunal shall make an endeavour to decide the matter as early as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. December 01, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE