THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH W.P.No.16050 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed, J) The petitioner-firm obtained loan for a sum of Rs.15 lakhs from the third respondent Bank by mortgaging the property in question. As it had committed default, the third respondent Bank issued notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘the Act’). Since there was no response from the petitioner, the third respondent issued notice under Section 13(4) of the Act. To struck down the said notices, the petitioner-firm filed S.A.No.116 of 2008 under Section 17(1) of the Act before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, which granted interim stay on condition of the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-and the same was complied by it. When the said Tribunal extended the stay subject to payment of Rs.3,00,000/-, the petitioner failed to comply with the same. Thereafter, S.A.No.116 of 2008 was dismissed vide order, dated 23.09.2009, against which, the petitioner filed R.A.(SA)No.777 of 2009 before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, along with I.A.No.778 of 2009 seeking stay of all further proceedings in pursuance of the notice, dated 16.07.2008 issued under Section 13(4) of the Act and the same is pending. While so, the respondent Bank is proceeding to take possession of the property in question vide proceedings, dated 27.05.2010, issued by the first respondent and consequential possession Notification, dated 24.06.2010, issued by the second respondent. Hence, this writ petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as the third respondent Bank sealed the premises in question with the assistance of the police and the stocks stored in it are perishable in nature, he prays to grant stay of all further proceedings. 3. Inasmuch as the application filed by the petitioner-firm before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Visakhapatnam, was dismissed on merits, the appeal as well as the stay petition filed before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, is pending, and the first respondent-District Collector has passed an order to take possession of the property in question, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition at this stage. Since the appeal as well as the stay petition filed before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, is pending consideration, we deem it appropriate to direct the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, to dispose of I.A.No.778 of 2009 in R.A.(SA) No.777 of 2009, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, no coercive steps shall be taken by the respondents-Bank. 4. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _________________ G. CHANDRAIAH, J Date:09.07.2010 sj