CWP No.4553 of 2009 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.4553 of 2009 Date of decision: March 23, 2009. inderjit Singh & Ors. ...Petitioner(s) v. State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Rohit Suri, Advocate for the petitioner. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): The petitioners seek quashing of the sale notice dated 21.2.2009 issued by the respondent-Bank. The petitioner firm availed four cash credit facilities and one term loan limit from the respondent-Bank. Plot No.266-A, 266-B, New Pratap Nagar, Amritsar was mortgaged as a security towards these loans. The petitioners having defaulted in payment of the due installments, four separate notices under section 13(2) of the the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 were served upon them. The petitioners challenged those notices before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Chandigarh in SA No.218 of CWP No.4553 of 2009 -: 2 :- 2008 in which interim stay was granted in their favour on 30.4.2008. The case was, however, dismissed in default due to oversight of the counsel on 5.5.2008. On an application for restoration, the Tribunal has restored the same on 1.9.2008 subject to the petitioners' depositing a sum of Rs.1.50 lacs in each of the four accounts before 29.10.2008. The petitioners are stated to have deposited a sum of Rs.6 lacs, as directed by the Tribunal, on 29.10.2008. Meanwhile, the respondent-Bank has issued the impugned auction notice inviting sealed tenders on 24.3.2009 for the recovery of a sum of Rs.26,71,727.67. The petitioners are stated to have moved two applications before the DRT, i.e., one for pre-ponement of the hearing of the case and the second for stay of the auction process. It is the petitioners' case that pursuant to the application for pre-ponement, the case has now been listed on 25.3.2009, when the prayer for interim stay is likely to be heard. In these circumstances, the petitioners allege that the action of the respondent-Bank in auctioning the secured assets by inviting tenders on 24.3.2009 is patently illegal and an attempt to frustrate the relief, as may be granted to them by the DRT. Having heard Learned Counsel for the Petitioners and keeping in view the nature of relief sought in this writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the same with a direction that the tenders invited by the respondent-Bank for the sale of the secured assets shall not be opened and no further action in that regard shall be taken till the stay application moved by the petitioner is decided by the DRT. Let a copy of this order, duly attested under the signatures of the Bench Secretary, be supplied to Learned Counsel for the Petitioners, CWP No.4553 of 2009 -: 3 :- during course of the day, of course, subject to production of a receipt regarding payment of usual charges prescribed for supply of an urgent dasti copy. March 23, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge