IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.19127 of 2010 Date of Decision : November 02, 2010. Ishwar Garg .....Petitioner versus State Bank of Patiala .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 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 is aggrieved by the impugned notices dated 15.10.2010 and 22.10.2010 (Annexures P-7 & P-9 respectively) issued under Sections 13(2) read with Section 13 (13) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Without challenging the notice on merits, the petitioner undertakes to pay the balance over-due amount as well as the future instalments on time. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and in the light of the decision dated 26.7.2010 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.5990 of 2010 (United Bank of India versus Satyawati C.W.P.No .19127 of 2010 2 Tondon and others), the petitioner has got an alternative remedy to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal within a period of two weeks. However, as an interim measure and keeping in view the fact that the petitioner's only residential house is sought to be auctioned, it is directed that subject to the petitioner's depositing Rs.one lac within one week, no coercive action shall be taken by the bank against him till the matter is finally decided by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, subject to, however, his paying the due monthly instalments. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. November 02, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE