DEEPAK KOCHHAR Vs. HDFC BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Heard forthwith.

(2.) The petitioners had preferred an Appeal before respondent No. 3. They also applied for waiver of deposit in preferring the Appeal. Respondent No. 2 by the order of 20th June, 2003, was pleased to direct the petitioners to deposit a sum of fifty percent of rs. 3,65,00,000/- within 8 weeks of the order. The petitioners admittedly did not deposit the amount. As a consequence thereof, on the expiry of the period of 8 weeks, the Appeal stood dismissed pursuant to the impugned order of 20th June, 2003. The present Petition came to be filed on 18th February, 2006. The main challenge, as urged on behalf of the petitioners by the learned counsel, is that considering the language of section 20 of The Recovery of Debts Due To Banks and financial Institutions Act, 1993 [which hereinafter shall be referred to as "rdb Act"] read with Section 21, it is only in the event an Appeal has been preferred against an order made under Section 19 of the Act would the requirement of deposit under Section 21 arise. In the instant case, it is pointed out that the impugned order was not passed under Section 19 and consequently, the order is liable to be set aside.

(3.) A few facts may now be stated. There is no dispute that the petitioners had taken a loan from the predecessor in title of respondent No. 1. The predecessor in title had filed a suit which was numbered as Suit No. 1467 of 1998 for recovery of its dues under a letter of credit facility and under a cash credit facility. Consent Decree came to be passed on 30th september, 1998. It is not necessary to go into the terms of the Consent Decree. The proceeding which were filed before this Court pursuant to the RDB Act coming into force were transferred to the Dent Recovery tribunal and were renumbered as Original Application no. 542 of 2001. It is pointed out that the OA is still pending against defendants No. 4 to 7 in the said OA. Respondent No. 1 filed Misc. Application No. 35 of 2002 under Section 31 of the RDB Act 1993, for a Recovery certificate based on the Consent Decree. On 27th september, 2002, the Recovery Certificate was issued for rs. 3,65,00,000/- with interest as prayed for by the respondents. Against that order, the Company preferred an Appeal and took out the application for waiver where the impugned order came to be passed.