IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.18097 of 2010 Date of Decision : October 05, 2010. Pinki and another .....Petitioners versus Punjab & Sind Bank and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Saurabh Bajaj, 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 petitioners allege themselves to be victims of fraud said to have been committed by the Branch Manager of the respondent-bank in connivance with one Jitender Kumar. It is alleged that a sum of Rs.5 lacs only was disbursed to the petitioners towards the house loan but the records have been manipulated to show as if they took a loan of Rs.13.50 lacs. Reliance is placed upon some FIRs got registered against the Branch Manager of the respondent bank and others. Having regard to the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.5990 of 2010 (United Bank of India versus Satyawati Tondon and others), decided on 26.7.2010, I am of the considered view that the only recourse available to the petitioners would C.W.P.No .18097 of 2010 2 be to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal against the impugned notices. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal, if so advised. However, keeping in view the nature of urgency, it is directed that the petitioners shall not be dispossessed by the respondents from the house in question for a period of one month from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order so as to enable them to approach the appropriate forum. Dasti. October 05, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE