STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. RAMKRISHNA BUILDERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application has been filed by State Bank of India and its officers, the defendants in Title Suit No. 411 of 2012 filed by the opposite party no. 1/plaintiff the constituent of the bank. In spite of service of the application the opposite party no. 1 has not appeared before this Court to contest this application. In these circumstances, this application was taken up for hearing in the absence of the opposite party no. 1.

(2.) In this application the petitioners have challenged the Order No.15 dated March 24, 2015 passed by the learned Judge, 13th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta in Title Suit No.411 of 2012 rejecting an application under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(3.) The ground on which the petitioner no. 1, being the defendant no. 1 in the said suit, filed the application for rejection of the plaint is that from the plaint filed in the said suit it is evident that the opposite party no. 1/plaintiff has filed the said suit challenging the notices issued by the petitioner no. 1 bank under sub-sections (2) and 4(a), Section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets & Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 2002") in respect of the secured asset being the immovable property mortgaged by the opposite party no. 1/plaintiff to secure the repayment of loan obtained from the defendant no. 1 bank. By the impugned order the learned Court below held that since the claim of the defendant no. 1 bank against the opposite party no. 1/plaintiff is Rs. 6,10,111/- which is less than the Rs. 10 lakhs, the suit is not barred under the Act of 2002 and the City Civil Court has the pecuniary jurisdiction to try the suit.