RAJ KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. STATE BANK OF PATIALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE DB.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for respondent No.1 accepts notice.

(3.) THE defendants in the suit failed to enter appearance resulting in them being proceeded ex parte vide order dated 2.2.1995. However, before Suit No.2061/1993 could be decided, the Recovery of Debt due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, came into force and consequently the proceedings were transferred to the Debt Recovery Tribunal. THE OA No.191/1995 (registered after transfer to the DRT) was decreed on 11.3.1997. THE one page order only records that ex parte evidence by an affidavit of the Manager of the Bank has been filed and since no cause is shown by the defendants there was nothing to disbelieve the statement of the witness. THE defendants were directed to pay a sum of Rs. 35,54,814.27 together with pendente lite and future interest @ 23.75 per cent per annum from the date of institution of the suit till the final realization of the entire amount. In the event of failure to pay the amount, respondent No.1-Bank was entitled to recover the amount by sale of the mortgaged property of the guarantor.