SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J.

The challenge in these petitions is to the order dated 27th August, 2015 passed in RA(SA)16 of 2015 and RA(SA)15 of 2015 by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, whereunder the interim order of stay granted earlier was directed to be vacated.

2. Shri N.R. Chandran, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the interim stay granted on 5th March, 2015 was vacated without assigning reasons. It is further contended that when the matter was taken up in the first round, a request was made to pass over the matter. Instead, the impugned orders, vacating the stay granted earlier were passed. The learned Senior Counsel would further urge that once the interim order has been granted, it is necessary to specify reasons for vacating the same. The Tribunal has passed the order, vacating the interim stay granted earlier without application of mind and also without assigning justifiable reasons for the same.

3. Notwithstanding the service of notice, all respondents, except 4th respondent, had chosen not to appear. The fourth respondent is represented through Mr. K.S. Kaviarasu, learned counsel representing Mr. K. Vignesh Karthik, learn