IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 11928 of 2010. [O&M] Date of Decision: 20th August 2010. IFCI Limited Petitioner through Mr. Manish Jain, Advocate and Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate. Versus The Chairman, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal & Anr. Respondents through Mr. V.K.Sachdeva, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 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? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL] The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 15.06.2010 [Annexure P-19] passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in Misc. Appeal No. 238/2010. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, learned counsel for the parties have been heard. Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed in this writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the same by directing the AAIFR to respond and adjudicate the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner that after taking possession of the secured assets, the reference before the BIFR stands abated and as a result thereto, the appeal preferred by the second respondent before the AAIFR has become infructuous. The AAIFR may also clarify as to whether the order to maintain status-quo has any direct or in-direct bearing on the proceedings separately initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The AAIFR shall make an endeavour to pass the appropriate orders on the date fixed and/or preferably within a period of one month thereafter. The second respondent shall, obviously be at liberty to contend otherwise before the AAIFR. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the parties to approach an appropriate forum after the orders are passed by the AAIFR. Dasti. August 20, 2010. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE