STATE BANK OF INDORE Vs. MEHTA INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI Puntambekar and Shri Neema made a strenuous search for the purpose of finding out the notification issued by the Government of India in view of the provisions of Section 3 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for convenience ). Both of them categorically stated that no Tribunal has been established in view of the provisions of Section 3 of the Act. They further stated that no notification has been issued by the Central Government in view of the provisions of Section 3 of the Act.

(2.) THE appellant is hereby assailing the correctness, propriety and legality of the order which has been passed by the Fourth Additional District Judge, Dewas, in the matter of 13-B/95 by which the learned judge returned the plaint to the appellant for presenting it before the Tribunal which has been contemplated by the provisions of Section 3 of the Act. The learned trial judge pointed out the provisions of Section 1 (c), sections 18 and 31 of the Act for justifying his decision of returning the plaint to the appellant.

(3.) THE appellant had filed a suit for recovery of a sum of more than Rs. 7,40,631. 65 along with interest and incidental cost from the respondents.