:1: 6614.11-wp bgp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6614 OF 2011 Mr.Krishandas Anand Karot & Anr. ..Petitioners Vs. India Bulls Housing Finance Ltd. ..Respondent Mr.Rishabh Shah with Mr.Punit Gogad and Ms.Rita Yadav i/b. Raval Shah & Co. for the Petitioners. Mr.Anup Khaitan for Respondent. .... CORAM :- DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATE :- 17 AUGUST 2011. P.C. 1. Against an order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal dated 12 July 2011 the Petitioners have preferred an appeal before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal. Since the term of the Chairperson of the Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai came to an end on 21 July 2011, an alternative arrangement has been made by the Union Government by giving concurrent charge to the Chairperson of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Kolkata. The only apprehension of the Petitioners is that in the meantime, the property has been listed for auction sale on 28 August 2011 even though the Petitioners paid the entire installments under a housing loan. It is submitted on behalf of the bank by the learned Counsel that there was a default on the part of the Petitioner in complying with the consent terms before the Tribunal. :2: 6614.11-wp 2. Be that as it may, since the Petitioner has filed an appeal before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal and in the peculiar circumstances, since there is no regular appointment to the post of Chairman, we had indicated to the learned Counsel for the Respondent that the bank may not take steps to auction the property for a period of six weeks. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent bank states fairly that the bank would defer the auction sale for a period of six weeks so as to enable the Petitioner to move the Appellate Tribunal for interim relief. The statement is taken on record. No further directions are sought. The petition is accordingly disposed of. (A.A.SAYED,J.) (DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD,J.)