SARASWATI WOOLLEN MILLS PVT LTD Vs. EBANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Under Section 21 of the RDDBFI Act, I directed the Appellant to deposit 25% of the debt due i.e. Rs. 56,43,881.35 p. as shown in the recovery certificate minus pendente lite and future interest and costs without prejudice to the rights of the parties within four weeks. The said amount was deposited. On 7th July, 2009 I decided the abovesaid case on merits. The relevant para 25 runs as follows:

(2.) Aggrieved by that order a writ was preferred before the Hon'ble High Court. The Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 17th August, 2009 dismissed the writ petition. Thereafter, a review petition was filed before the High Court. The High Court permitted the Defendants to raise the abovementioned three points. The Hon'ble High Court further directed the Trial Court to frame issues.

(3.) In the meantime, the Appellant has moved an application for withdrawal of amount deposited in compliance of condition under Section 21 of RDDBFI Act, 1993. The learned Counsel for the Appellant pointed out that since no amount has been determined by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, therefore, the money already deposited by him should be returned to the applicant. On the other hand, the Counsel for the Respondent bank vehemently argued that the appeal has been partly allowed and the recovery certificate is still pending.