HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD, J W.P. No. 22240 of 2011 DATED: 24.08.2011 Between: Corporation Bank .. Petitioner And 1. The Debts Recovery Tribunal 2. O. Jyothi 3. O. V. Subba Rao 4. Ministry of Finance Banking Division .. Respondents O R D E R :- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ashutosh Mohunta) It is asserted that respondent Nos.2 and 3 and others, in March 2006, having availed loan of Rs.5,00,000/- from the petitioner- Corporation Bank, defaulted in repayment of the loan, as such, the petitioner-Corporation Bank issued Possession Notice dated 19.12.2009 fixing the date of sale of the property in question on 03.03.2010 and also took physical possession of the property. Challenging the Possession Notice, respondent Nos.2 and 3 filed S.A. No. 49 of 2010 along with an application in I.A. No. 233 of 2010 seeking stay of the Notice, and the 1st respondent-Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad, by order dated 03.03.2010, permitted the petitioner-Corporation Bank to conduct sale of the property, but stayed confirmation of the sale. Then, the petitioner filed counter in I.A. No. 233 of 2010 and also reply statement in S.A. No. 49 of 2010. Now, the grievance of the petitioner-Corporation Bank is that even though the petitioner filed counter affidavit and also reply statement, the 1st respondent-Debts Recovery Tribunal, has not disposed of S.A. No. 49 of 2010 so far. Hence, the present writ petition is filed seeking appropriate directions. Smt. V. Dyumani, learned counsel for the petitioner-Corporation Bank, has submitted that there is no regular Presiding Officer to the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad since May, 2010. It is further submitted that although the Presiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Bombay is the In-charge for Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad, he comes to Hyderabad only twice in a month, as such, the case of the petitioner has not yet been disposed of. She has further submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is given to the 1st respondent-Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad to dispose of S.A. No. 49 of 2010 at the earliest. Sri Ramanujam, learned senior counsel has submitted that he has no objection to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of the above submissions, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent-Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad to dispose of S.A. No. 49 of 2010 expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. _____________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J 24.08.2011 ___________________ P. DURGA PRASAD, J Note: Furnish copy in a week B/o bcj