THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.16402 of 2011 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in publishing the sale notice dated 09.06.2011 as illegal and arbitrary. Petitioners state that they are not the original borrowers. According to them, M/s.G.V.Constructions, a sole proprietary concern of late Garigapati Venkata Rao, who is the father of the petitioners availed a loan/over draft facility of Rs.1,50,00,000/- from the respondent-bank by mortgaging the property admeasuring 399 sq. yards in Sy.No.236/2, Patta No.72, plot No.11 situated in Vijaya Gardens, Sarpavaram junction, Kakinada. Their father died on 30.10.2009. While so, the respondent- bank during the course of post disbursement follow up, found that the said loan account became irregular and classified it as NPA. Pursuant to which, it issued notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘the Act’) on 12.5.2009. It also filed O.A. No. 86 of 2009 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,62,68,255.03 with further interest. However, when the petitioners failed to pay the amount in pursuance of the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Act, the bank issued possession notice dated 28.08.2009 and the sale notice 27.11.2009. Challenging the same, the petitioners filed S.A.No.199 of 2009 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam. Along with the aforesaid appeal, the petitioners filed an application in I.A.No.725 of 2009 seeking stay of the further proceedings in pursuance of the possession notice 28.08.2009 and the sale notice 27.11.2009. By order dated 18.02.2010, the Tribunal dismissed the I.A. holding that the notices were sent to the last known address to the donee of the mortagagor, i.e., in the name of late Gaikipati Venkata Rao and his legal representatives. Subsequent thereto, the petitioners filed R.A.No.1 of 2010 before the Tribunal to review the earlier order in I.A.No.725 of 2009. Along with the said R.A., the petitioners filed I.A.No.186 of 2010 seeking injunction or stay against the respondent-bank to debar it from alienating or otherwise dealing with or disposing of the schedule mentioned property. The Tribunal, through its order dated 10.03.2010, allowed I.A.No.186 of 2010 and granted stay till the disposal of R.A.No.1 of 2010. Challenging the same, the respondent-bank filed MA(SA).No.456 of 2010 before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai and the Appellate Tribunal, by order dated 21.03.2011, disposed of the application directing the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam to take up the review petition within three months from today. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent-bank without serving any such order of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, issued the impugned sale notice dated 09.06.2011 to them proposing to sell the schedule mentioned property. Hence they filed the present Writ Petition. On 15.06.2011, this Court while ordering notice before admission stayed sale of the property in question for one week and it was further extended on 23.06.2011 till 27.06.2011. A counter affidavit is filed by the respondent bank wherein it denied the contention of the petitioners that they were not served with any notice. It is further stated that as per the orders of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, it issued sale notice dated 09.06.2011 proposing to sell the schedule mentioned property. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent-bank and gone through the impugned order. In view of the fact that S.A.No.199 of 2009 is pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam for adjudication, we are not inclined to go into the merits of the case. However, ends of justice would be met if a direction is issued to the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam to dispose of S.A.No.199 of 2009 expeditiously. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam to dispose of S.A. No. 199 of 2009, within a period of one month from today. Till then, the respondent- bank shall not take any coercive steps in respect of the schedule mentioned property. No costs. GHULAM MOHAMMED,J K.G.SHANKAR,J Dt:07.07.2011 pnb