IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.5618 of 2010 Date of decision:30.03.2010 M/s Sohan Lal Satar Lal & Company, Sadar Bazaar, Nabha through its proprietor Ashok Kumar Bansal son of Shri Sitara Lal. ....Petitioner versus Canara Bank, Circle Office, Plot No.1, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh, through its Deputy General Manager and others. ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for Mr. I.P.S.Kohli, 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 ? ---- K.Kannan, J. (Oral) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that he has filed the writ petition, although there is a remedy provided under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act only because there is no Presiding Officer and that the sale has been effected on 25.03.2010 and that unless a judicial intervention is made now, the sale will be confirmed and the objection which he is taking now shall be rendered infructuous. 2. Taking the submission of the petitioner, I grant the liberty to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under Section 17 by way of an appeal and in view of specific difficulties Civil Writ Petition No.5618 of 2010 - 2 - pointed out that there is no Presiding Officer and he is expected to hold Court only on 05.04.2010, there shall be no further order pursuant to the auction sale held on 25.03.2010 till the appeal is presented and when the Presiding Officer in the DRT takes a decision one way or the other. Subject to this restriction about the effect of the order and affording to the petitioner the liberty as indicated above, the writ petition is disposed of. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 30.03.2010 sanjeev