THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI DATED: 31-12-2009 WRIT PETITION No. 27175 OF 2009 Between: M/s. Sanjay Re-rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., Nacharam, rep., by its Managing Director, Ashok Kumar Agarwal, s/o. Late Prahaladrai, aged about 50 years, r/o. Plot No. 27/A, H.No. 1-98/9/27/A, Madhapur, Jaihind enclave, Cyberabad ..... PETITIONER AND Canara Bank, R.P Road Branch, rep., by its Authorised Officer, ARM Branch, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No. 27175 OF 2009 ORDER: (per Sri A. Gopal Reddy, J) This writ petition is filed challenging the docket order dated 23- 10-2009 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad in S.A No. 72 of 2009, whereby interim stay granted in favour of the petitioner was extended on condition of depositing a further sum of Rs.10,00,000/-, apart from the amount of Rs.10,00,000/- deposited pursuant to the interim order passed earlier. The Tribunal adjourned the matter to 08-12-2009 calling upon the petitioner to adduce evidence by the said date to dispose of the appeal. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Tribunal having satisfied with the prima facie case and balance of convenience in favour of the petitioner granted stay of auction notice dated 14-02-2009, on 02-03-2009 in I.A No. 283 of 2009, with respect to the petition schedule property on condition of the petitioner depositing Rs.10,00,000/- and modifying the said order by the impugned docket order amounts to reviewing the earlier order and since the Tribunal is not conferred with such jurisdiction, the same is liable to be set aside. We see no force in the said contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The Tribunal granted ex parte interim order on 02-03-2009 staying the auction on condition of the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-, out of which Rs.3,00,000/- shall be payable on or before 28-03-2009 and the balance of Rs.7,00,000/- shall be payable on or before 29-05-2009. On the respondent – Bank filing counter seeking vacation of the said order, the Tribunal by the impugned docket order modified the earlier order passed by it. No illegality or infirmity is discernible with the discretion exercised by the Tribunal warranting interference of this Court. Further, it is not disputed that the liability of the petitioner is more than Rs.1,00,00,000/- . Therefore, taking the same into consideration, only one-fifth of the debt was directed to be deposited for granting interim stay of the auction, pending the appeal, which, in our view, is reasonable. In view of the same, we do not see any merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. However, time for deposit is extended till 15-02-2009, subject to the condition that the petitioner proceeds with the appeal on the next date of hearing, which is said to be posted on 29-01-2010 and cooperates with the Tribunal for early disposal of the same. The respondent – Bank is entitled to withdraw the amount already deposited and also the amount to be deposited by the petitioner. A. GOPAL REDDY, J NOUSHAD ALI, J 31-12-2009 ks