K V S SALAMMAL Vs. DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE legal heirs of the sole defendant in C.S. No. 107 of 1998 of this court, which has since been transferred to the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Chennai, are the writ petitioners in both the writ petitions.

(2.) THE suit in question was filed by the second respondent/Indian Bank in the year 1993 as C.S. No. 107 of 1993. During the pendency of the suit the sole defendant died on June 14, 1993, even before the service of summons. Even though the sole defendant died, the legal heirs were not impleaded and the suit was lying on the original side of this court and eventually, it abated on November 13, 1993. Meanwhile, the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (Act 51 of 1993), was notified on June 24, 1993, and the Debts Recovery Tribunal for Chennai came into force on November 1, 1996. After the constitution of the Tribunal, the suit has been transferred from the original side of this court to the Tribunal in terms of section 31 of the said Act. Before the Tribunal the second respondent moved an application as I.A. No. 44 of 1997 in T.A. No. 186 of 1997 (C.S. No. 107 of 1993) to implead the legal representatives of the sole defendant stating that they were not aware of the factum of the death of the defendant and they came to know about the same only recently. THE application was resisted by the writ petitioners contending that the factum of death was known to the second respondent/bank in the year 1993 itself and the petition has been filed belatedly. THEy further contended that the proceeding before the Tribunal was without jurisdiction. THE Tribunal, however, repelled the contentions of the writ petitioners and allowed the application as prayed for impleading the legal representatives of the deceased/sole defendant, who are the writ petitioners in these writ petitions. THE writ petitions are directed against the aforesaid order of the Tribunal in I.A. No. 44 of 1997 in T.A. No. 186 of 1997 impleading the legal representatives of the deceased and also seeking a writ of prohibition prohibiting the Tribunal from proceeding further with the transferred application, namely, T.A. No. 186 of 1997.Heard learned counsel on both the sides. Learned counsel for the petitioners reiterated the contentions advanced before the forum below. According to him, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit in C.S. No. 107 of 1993 on the file of this court under section 31(1) of the said Act (51 of 1993) on transfer and deal with the same. THE specific case put forward by learned counsel is that it is not a suit pending before the High Court on the date of the establishment of the Tribunal. Having bestowed our anxious consideration to the aforesaid contention, we are afraid we cannot accede to the same.