HOKA KONYAK Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was the defendant No. 2 in Money Suit No. 2 of 1990 filed in the Court of the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Mon, Nagaland by the State Bank of India, Naginimora Branch, the respondent No. 3 herein, has by the present petition challenged the proceeding pending before the learned Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati, initiated against him amongst other defendants in the suit for realization of an amount of Rs. 15,76,768.01 in terms of the judgment and decree dated 25th May, 1994 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial).

(2.) The facts relevant for the purpose of the present writ petition may be noticed as under.

(3.) The plaintiff bank, thereafter, filed an application before the Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, for issuance of a certificate under Section 19(7) of the Recovery of Debts due to Bank and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, which has been registered as O.A. No. 38 of 1999, wherein notices were issued to all the defendants in the said suit including the present petitioner, who however, did not contest such proceeding. The Certificate was thereafter directed to be issued vide order dated 18.2.2000 against all the defendants in the suit including the present petitioner. Since the decree has not been satisfied, warrant of arrest was thereafter issued against the present petitioner in the month of June, 2005 and the petitioner has obtained the order for pre-arrest bail on 20th June, 2005. According to the petitioner, he, for the first time, on issuance of such warrant of arrest came to know about the Certificate issued against him for realization of the decreetal amount as decreed vide judgment and decree dated 25.5.94. The petitioner, therefore, has filed the present writ petition challenging the proceeding before the learned Debts Recovery Tribunal and the Certificate issued on such proceeding for realization of the said amount against him contending that the judgment and decree passed on 25.5.94 in Money Suit No. 2 of 1990 being the decree passed under Order XII Rule 6, CPC does not bind him. The petitioner has also in the present writ petition challenged Section 25(b) and Section 29 of the Recovery of Debts due to Bank and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 and also the violation of the procedure in issuing the Certificate.