S SRINIVASAN Vs. KARNATAKA BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, Managing Director of M/s M.A.Tex Private Limited (Company under liquidation for short) preferred an appeal against the order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore. In the said appeal, the petitioner, who was the second defendant before the DRT filed I.A.No.231 of 2008 in U.R.A.No.33/2007 to implead the Company as second appellant, which was shown as the second respondent before the appellate Tribunal. Karnataka Bank Limited, which was the applicant before the DRT, Coimbatore and the first respondent before the appellate Tribunal, objected the petition for transposing the company as one of the appellant on the ground that the Company may prefer a separate appeal having different entity. THE appellate Tribunal, Chennai, by impugned order dated 05.08.2008 have rejected the petition to transpose the company as the second appellant. THE petitioner who was the second defendant/appellant before the appellate Tribunal, has filed this Civil Revision Petition.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY, the petitioner, 2nd defendant before the DRT, Coimbatore, his wife, 3rd defendant before the said Tribunal are the guarantors. The Company is the borrower. As the company is under liquidation, the DRT, passed an order against the company, 2nd defendant (petitioner and guarantor) and 3rd defendant (his wife-guarantor).

(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and noticed the rival contentions and the records.