CANARA BANK, SHIVAJINAGAR BRANCH Vs. SHIVMONI AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions are filed by the appellant and respondents in MA 49/2003 on the file of the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Chennai (DRAT for short), arising out of orders on IA No.6 in OA 702/1996 (earlier filed in O.S.No.2311/1993 on the file of City Civil Court, CCH -17, Bangalore. Subsequent to the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 coming into force, the said suit was transferred to DRT Bangalore and renumbered as OA.702/1996 on the file of DRT Bangalore. The application in I.A.No.6 was filed under Order 38 Rule 6 & 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure for vacating the order of attachment before judgment granted in favour of the plaintiffs, Canara Bank & Syndicate Bank, vide order dated:15.4.1993 on I.A.No.2 in the erstwhile original suit in respect of property bearing No.19 -B, Block 'W', Greater Kailash, New Delhi admeasuring 473 Sq.Yds. The order under challenge in these two writ petitions is the order dated 27th September 2006 of DRAT, partially allowing the appeal in MA 49/2003.

(2.) I .A.No.6 in the appeal proceeding was filed by a third party to the said proceedings viz., M/s Shivmoni and Co, a partnership firm, for vacating the interim order of attachment before judgment granted on I.A.No.2 in the said proceedings. The said application was dismissed by DRT, Bangalore, vide order dated: 2.12.2002. The order of DRT was taken up in appeal by the third party applicant in M.A.49/2003 on the file of DRAT. The said appeal was dismissed at first instance by order dated: 3.3.2005, which was under challenge in W.P.No.15371/2005 on the file of learned single judge of this court. The said writ petition came to be allowed on 9.11.2005 setting aside the order impugned in the said petition and remanding the appeal for fresh consideration. In the remanded appeal, DRAT by order dated: 27.9.2006 allowed the same in part raising the attachment to an extent of 50% of the property in question.

(3.) BEING aggrieved by the said order these two petitions are filed. The petition in WP No.18776/2006 is by plaintiff -Banks viz., Canara Bank and Syndicate Bank, respondents in the appeal before DRAT, challenging the order of DRAT so far as it reduced the attachment before judgment of property in question to the extent of 50%. The petition, W.P.No.16456/2006, is by the third party in the original proceedings, who is appellant before DRAT, challenging the rejection of its prayer for raising the attachment of remaining 50% of the property in question.