Court No. - 27 Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 7194 of 2010 Petitioner :- Smt. Laxmi Omar Respondent :- Punjab National Bank Branch Nishatganj Lucknow Thro. Its Petitioner Counsel :- Rajiv Kumar Sinha Respondent Counsel :- D.K.Pathak Hon'ble Devi Prasad Singh,J.
Hon’ble S.C. Chaurasia,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri D.K.Pathak on behalf of
opposite party no. 1. We do not enter into the merit of the controversy, hence,
issuance of notice to private respondent is dispensed with.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner
has got no concern with the loan, for which a notice under sub-section 4 of
Section 13 of the Secutirisation Act has been served.
Controversy involved disputed question of fact. Liberty is given to the
petitioner to prefer an appeal before DRT under Section 17 of the
Securitisation Act along with application for interim relief. Application may
be decided by the Tribunal expeditiously and preferably within a period of
two months from the date of filing of suit along with stay application. The
tribunal shall consider and decide the stay application in accordance to law
after providing due opportunity of hearing to the parties. The tribunal shall
also proceed with the appeal expeditiously. For the period of two months or
till disposal of stay application status-quo as exists today shall be maintained.
Subject to above, writ petition is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 30.7.2010
Madhu