SHOES EAST LIMITED Vs. ALLAHABAD BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 24.5.96 passed by Debt Recovery Tribunal refusing to stay the proceedings initiated by the respondentBank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short the Act).

(2.) Learned Counsel for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that an adequate and efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner under Section 20 of the Act. It is undisputed that the Appellate Tribunal has since been constituted. Inevitably, the issue here has to run around the language of the statute and, therefore, the provisions of the Section 17 of the Act maybe read at the very outset. Section 17 reads as under:

(3.) Section 19 of the Act, deals with the filing of an application before the Tribunal and Sub-section (4), of Section 19 of this Act empowers the Tribunal to pass such orders on the application filed under Section 19 as it thinks fit to meet the ends of justice, under Sub-section (6) of Section 19, the Tribunal may pass interlocutory orders in a pending proceedings. Section 20 of the Act, gives a right of appeal to the Appellate Tribunal from an order of the Tribunal made under the Act. Section 20 reads as follows :