DHAR INDUSTRIES LTD Vs. DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is assailing the interim order passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal on 9-10-2000 (Annexure P-12) directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. Two crores within a period of 12 weeks out of the decretal amount of Rs. 6,80,31,209. 11.

(2.) PETITIONER was granted a loan for working capital in the year 1995. An application was filed before the Debts Recovery Tribunal by Bank of India, Indore for recovery of Rs. 6,80,31,209. 11. Judgment was passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal on 10-8-2000 (Annexure P-9 ). The Bank was entitled to recover the interest @ 18. 36 p. a. with quarterly rests from 29-5-2000 till the realisation of the outstanding dues. Against this order the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal. An interim order was passed and directed the deposit of Rs. Two crores within a period of 12 weeks failing which the appeal shall not be entertained. It was further observed that such amount of deposit is to be held without being paid to the Bank towards satisfaction of the dues and would be dealt with at the time of final hearing of the appeal. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal is extremely harsh and in the facts and circumstances of the case the petitioner have to close the industry or sale part of it to make the deposit as ordered by the Appellate Tribunal. It is further submitted that gross illegalities were made by the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Principles of natural justice were not followed before passing the judgment. Petitioner has been deprived of seeking real justice. It is also the submission that application could not be filed without the assent of lead bank and other banks which were parties to the agreement. There was no notice for the date of 10-8-2000 which was the date for filing the reply. Thus the Tribunal acted unreasonably in passing the order.

(3.) SMT. Indira Nair, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No. 8 submits that provisions of Section 21 has been enacted by the Legislature. The Appellate Tribunal has directed that an amount of Rs. Two crores be deposited out of about Rs. Seven crores. Thus the order passed by the Tribunal for depositing 1/3 of the decretal amount cannot be said to be harsh, unfair or unreasonable.