(1.) This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 9-11-2006 by which the Tribunal has rejected the application for cross-examining the witness of the bank.
(2.) The facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are that M/s. Konark Paper and Industries Ltd. of which the petitioner was the Managing Director approached the opposite party No. 1, the State Bank of India for financial assistance in the year 1981 and considering his application, the said Bank granted medium term loan of Rs. 25 lakhs by sanction order dated 9-7-1981 and for that purpose several documents were executed. As the bank loan had not been paid in time and there was default on the part of the petitioner, the opposite party bank filed O.A. No. 16 of 2006 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (hereinafter called the Tribunal') for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,05,61,676/- under the provisions of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter called the 'Act, 1993'). After receiving the notice, the petitioner entered appearance and filed a written statement stating inter alia, that loan documents annexed to the original application had not been executed properly and the opposite party-bank had taken signature of the petitioner on blank papers, which he made in good faith. Execution of large number of documents was denied altogether by the petitioner. The opposite party-bank filed the evidence on affidavit in support of the factual aspects of the case as pleaded in the original application. Petitioner also replied the same by filing affidavit supporting his submission made in the written statement. Petitioner submitted an application i.e. M.A. No. 606 of 2006 on 26-10-2006 before the Tribunal praying for permission of cross-examination of the deponent i.e. Manager of the opposite party-bank submitting that it was necessary for the applicant to verify the facts as most of the documents were not genuine. The opposite party-bank filed objection to the said application and ultimately the Tribunal dismissed the said application vide order dated 9-11-2006 (Annex. 4) with cost of Rs. 1000/-. Hence this appeal.
(3.) Mr. S. Udgata, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that dismissal of the application is in violation of the provisions of Rule 12(6) of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993 (hereinafter called the 'Rules, 1993') and the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the petition deserved to be allowed.
ABOUT US "REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD." is a Company incorporated in 1991 under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. Since its inception to 1995, the Company was busy in carrying out the activities related to various Banks' Job Work..
Read More
Sales: sales@the-laws.com
Support: info@the-laws.com
8000853936
9376168072
27, 4TH FLOOR, Agrawal Center, Ashram Road, Income Tax, Ahmadabad 380014.
LOGIN