KASHINATH MISHRA Vs. DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Umesh Narain Sharma, the learned senior Counsel, assisted by Shri R.C. Singh, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Siddharth, the learned counsel for respondent No. 3.

(2.) THE petitioner's industry was sanctioned a credit facility of Rs. 7.5 lacs in 1998 by Canara Bank with regard to its working capital and term loan against the hypothecation of the raw material. THE petitioner stood as a guarantor, and an agreement to this effect was executed. THE Company and its Partners/Directors availed the credit facility, but failed to regularise their Accounts, as a result of which, the Bank initiated recovery proceedings of Rs. 14.40 lacs by filing a claim application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. It transpires that an ex parte order was passed allowing the claim of the Bank. When the petitioner came to know about the ex parte order, he filed a restoration application, which was rejected, against which, the petitioner preferred Writ Petition No. 10774 of 2002, which was eventually allowed vide judgment dated 10th August, 2004 and the ex parte order dated 12th of March, 2001 and the order dated 25th of February, 2002, passed on the restoration application, were quashed.

(3.) IN view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the opinion that an expert's opinion at the instance of the petitioner was only a device to delay the proceedings. Consequently, the finding on this aspect given by Debts Recovery Tribunal cannot be interfered with.