BANK OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. ELLORA STEELS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these appeals can be disposed of by this common judgment and order as they are arising out of common judgment and order dated 4.4.2003 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad in five original applications filed by the Bank of Maharashtra and Bank of India against the very same respondents. Appeal No. 89 of 2003 is arising out of Original Application No. 137A/2001. Appeal No. 90 of 2003 is arising out of Original Application No. 126A/2001. Appeal No. 91 of 2003 is arising out of Original Application No. 374A/ 2001. Appeal No. 92 of 2003 is arising out of Original Application No. 101A/2Q01, while Appeal No. 93 of 2003 is arising out of Original Application No. 139A/2001. While first four appeals are filed by the Bank of Maharashtra, Appeal No. 93 of 2003 is filed by the Bank of India. Issues involved in all the appeals are same and prayers also are common. By the impugned order, the learned Presiding Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad, while allowing the original applications in favour of the applicant Banks, directed the defendant Nos. 1 to 3, 5 and defendant No. 6 (represented by the Receiver, High Court, Bombay) to pay jointly and severally the amount mentioned in the operative portion of the order pertaining to the respective original applications. The learned Presiding Officer dismissed all the original applications against the defendant No. 4 Surendra Kumar Sitaram Gupta. The learned Presiding Officer also gave certain consequential declarations. The Bank of Maharashtra and the Bank of India are aggrieved by that portion of the order, by which the defendant No. 4 Surendra Kumar Sitaram Gupta has been exonerated. The Banks are also aggrieved because of the low rate of pendente lite and post -decree interest awarded by the learned Presiding Officer. It is, therefore, prayed by the Banks that the impugned judgment and order so far it dismisses the original applications against the defendant No. 4 be set aside and he be held jointly and severally liable along with other respondents to pay the sum, which has been ordered to be paid while disposing of the original applications along with future interest, etc. It is also prayed that rate of interest as granted by the learned Presiding Officer be modified by awarding future interest as the rate of 19.25 per cent per annum with quarterly rests. . .

(2.) Few facts, which are required to be stated, are as follows. Needless to say, the facts and chronology of events are common. However, for the sake of convenience for deciding these appeals by common judgment, facts are taken from Appeal I To. 90 of 2003, which is arising out of Original Application No. 126A/2001.

(3.) Rest of the order remains as it is.