IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.21262 of 2010 Date of Decision : November 30, 2010. Gaurav Singh .....Petitioner versus Axis Bank and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.D.S.Gurna, 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 Possession Notice dated 30.9.2010 (Annexure P-4) said to have been issued by the respondent-bank under Section 13 (4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as `the 2002 Act'). The petitioner is a guarantor of the loan advanced by the respondent-bank to the second respondent. The petitioner's contention is that the 'secured assets' in respect whereof the impugned notice has been issued, is 'agricultural land' as per the jamabandi for the 2004-2005 (Annexure P-5) and is exempted from the rigors of the 2002 Act in terms of Section 31 (i) of the Act. C.W.P.No .21262 of 2010 2 Having heard leaned counsel for the petitioner and in the light of the decision dated 26.7.2010 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.5990 of 2010 (United Bank of India versus Satyawati Tondon and others), I am of the considered view that the petitioner has got an efficacious alternative remedy to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal within a period of two weeks. Since the petitioner has prima-facie made out an arguable case, it is directed that the petitioner shall not be dispossessed of the subject agricultural land for a period of two weeks to enable him to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Dasti. November 30, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE