K LAKSHMINARAYANA UPADHAY Vs. UNION OF INDIA UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I.A.I is filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the Debt Recovery Tribunal to record evidence of the Bank's witnesses not by resorting to acceptance of affidavits in place of examination-in-chief but, by oral examination.

(2.) The Bank has filed an application under the provisions of the Recovery of Debts due to Bank and financial Institution Act, 1993 against the petitioner before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (third respondent). The grievance of the petitioner is that the Tribunal is adopting a procedure whereby examination-in-chief of the witnesses is taken in the form of affidavits and the said witnesses are made available for cross-examination by the other side. Petitioner contends that this is contrary to the provisions of C.P.C. and principles of natural justice. According to him, the Tribunal should record the evidence of witnesses even in regard to examination-in-chief and should not accept affidavits.

(3.) Section 22 of the said Act provides that the Tribunal shall not be bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure, but, shall be guided by the principles of natural justice and subject to the other provisions of the Act and of any rules, the Tribunals shall have powers to regulate their own procedure including the places at which they shall have their sittings.