HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9338 of 2025 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Vikas Nag, Advocate for the respondent-bank. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 21.08.2025 passed by the Learned Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Lucknow, whereby S.A. No. 17 of 2023 was directed to be connected with other two SAs (No. 583 of 2023 and No. 974 of 2023) and listed for final arguments on 19.09.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner had preferred an Amendment Application (I.A. No. 2722 of 2023) and an Interim Application (I.A. No. 2891 of 2023) for restoration of possession, which have not yet been decided by the Tribunal. He expresses apprehension that these applications may not be decided before the final hearing of the matter. 4. While the impugned order does not explicitly state that these applications will not be decided, it is a well-established principle that all pending applications must be adjudicated before a matter is decided on merits. It is therefore clarified that while deciding the matter finally, the DRT will consider and pass a reasoned order on the pending Amendment Application and the Interim Application as well. 5. It is needless to add that the parties shall be afforded an opportunity of hearing on the applications as well as the main petition. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed of. As the order is only clarificatory, there is no need for a counter affidavit from the respondent. September 18, 2025 Haseen U. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Khare, Navneet Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Nisha Quraishi .....Petitioner(s) Bank Of Maharashtra Thru. Authorised Officer Branch Shahjahnpur U.P. .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- HASEENUDDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench