IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13391 of 2010 Date of Decision : July 30, 2010. M/s Lord Buddha's Society and others .....Petitioners versus Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.P.K.Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioners. -.- 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 respondent-bank has taken action under Section 13 (4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short `the SARFAESI Act') against the petitioners for non-payment of the loan amount which, as it appears now is more than Rs.10 crores. The petitioners preferred an appeal under Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act but having been declined the ad-interim stay, they preferred an appeal before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Delhi. The Appellate Tribunal granted conditional ad-interim stay against auction of the `secured assets' subject to the petitioners depositing a sum of Rs.2.5 crores in 5 instalments by 19th July, 2010. As the petitioners failed to comply with the said condition despite liberal opportunity given to C.W.P.No .13391 of 2010 2 them, the Appellate Tribunal vide its order dated 21.7.2010 (Annexure P8) has dismissed their appeal, still with liberty that if they are able to deposit the amount in the near future, they may file an appropriate application for restoration of the appeal. Meanwhile, the respondent-bank has issued an auction notice for 7.8.2010. Aggrieved, the petitioners have approached this Court. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and keeping in view the order passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, I am of the considered view that the only recourse left for the petitioners is to move an application before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Delhi and show their bonafide by depositing a substantial part of the balance amount in terms of the previous order(s) of said Tribunal. Upon doing so, the learned Appellate Tribunal may issue appropriate directions to protect the interest of the petitioners, if so permissible in law. Disposed of. Dasti. July 30, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE