P R GOVINDARAJULU Vs. DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER seeks Writ of Certiorari to quash the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai dated 20.04.2005 made in Review Application No.3/2004 in M.P.No.7/2002 in Transferred Application No.38/2002.

(2.) 2nd Respondent Bank filed Civil Suit in C.S.No.206/1995 in the High Court, Madras [Original Side] against the Petitioner claiming a sum of Rs.6,39,722.17 on the basis of the credit card. When the pecuniary jurisdiction of City Civil Court was enhanced, the suit C.S.No.206/1995 was transferred from the High Court, Madras to the City Civil Court, Chennai and the suit was re-numbered as O.S.No.9113/1995. In that suit, there was an exparte decree and when the Petitioner filed Petition to set aside the exparte decree, the said Petition was allowed on condition that the Defendant [Writ Petitioner] should deposit 1/4th of the suit claim.

(3.) MR.R.Nadanasabapathy, learned counsel for Petitioner contended that CRP.No.836/1999 was allowed setting aside the order of imposing condition directing the Defendant to deposit 1/4th of the suit claim and therefore, while allowing M.A.No.7/2002, Court ought not to have imposed condition to remit Rs.1,00,000/- to the credit of the 2nd Respondent Bank. It was further contended since the order in M.A.No.7/2002 was perse erroneous, Debts Recovery Tribunal-II ought to have allowed the Review Application and Debts Recovery Tribunal-II erred in dismissing the Review Application. It was further contended that Review Application was not at all considered on merits and the order passed is against the principles of natural justice and is liable to be quashed.