1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Writ Petition No. 2316 of 2008. [Kanchandevi Somani vs. Union of India and others] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri M. G. Sarda, Advocate for petitioner. Shri R. L. Khapre Advocate for R-2 & 3. Coram : B.H. Marlapalle and A.H. Joshi, JJ. Dated : 10th NOVEMBER, 2008. Heard Mr. Ghodeswar Learned Counsel for the petitioner who is a borrower of the respondent no.3 Bank. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order passed under Section 13(4) consequent to the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short The Act). Undoubtedly, the petitioner has a remedy of appeal under Section 17 of the Securitisation Act against the impugned order dated 24-4-2008. The petitioner contends that the issue regarding the legality of the notification dated 28-1-003 is pending before the Supreme Court in SLP No.17573/07 and 2 therefore, this petition is maintainable. In W. P. No.2672 of 2007 filed before the Aurangabad Bench of this Court, the notification dated 28-1-2003 was challenged and the petition came to be dismissed. However, the operation of the order was stayed by the Aurangabad Bench of this Court and the same order has been continued by the apex Court from time to time. Merely because the Judgment of this Court has been challenged before the Supreme Court is no reason to entertain this petition. The petitioner has a remedy of appeal under Section 17 of the Securitisation Act and all the issues raised in this petition can be raised in the appeal to be filed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Hence, the petition is rejected with liberty to approach the DRT by way of an appeal under Section 17 of the Securitisation Act, and if such an appeal is filed within a period of two weeks from today, the ad interim order passed by this Court on 23-6-2008 shall continue for the said period. If there is any issue of limitation in filing the 3 appeal before the DRT, the period of pendency of this petition from 5-6-2008 shall be taken into consideration. JUDGE JUDGE //Muley//.