Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2019 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 1631 - HC - Indian LawsValidity of notification dated 06.09.2018 issued by the Central Government in exercise of powers conferred by subsection (4) of Section 1 of the Act of 1993 - recovery of debts in the Debts Recovery Tribunal by banks and financial institutions - Whether the Central Government, by issuing the aforesaid notification, was competent to raise the threshold limit of ten to twenty lakh rupees for maintainability of a petition for recovery of debt before the Debts Recovery Tribunal by any bank or financial institution? HELD THAT:- The substantial energy and resources of the large number of Tribunals across the country is being consumed for the segment of the recovery cases having value between ten and twenty lakh rupees, which although account for 41% of the total pendency but on the present scale account only 5% of the total value of the recovery claims. The notification issued by the Central Government raising the limit of ten to twenty lakh rupees is therefore intended to achieve the object with which the Tribunals were set up as would be evident from the statement of objects and reasons as also preamble of the Act of 1993. Section 1(4) of the Act of 1993 has not indicated any outer threshold value of the claim upto which the limit could be raised but we see no reason to enter into that aspect firstly because the validity of Section 1(4) of the Act of 1993 has not been challenged in the present writ petition and secondly we are satisfied with the reasons given by the Central Government that enhancing the threshold limit for filing claims before the Tribunals to twenty lakh rupees, cannot be considered excessive. Even otherwise, the worth of ten lakh rupees in the year 1993 when the Act was introduced, due to price inflation, was ₹ 49.23 lakh in the year 2017, meaning thereby, the value of one rupee in 1993 stood reduced to approximately twenty paisa in 2017. Even when the constitutional validity of Section 1(4) of the Act of 1993 has not been challenged in the present writ petition, we find that sufficient guidelines are available in the Act of 1993 by way of its preamble, statement of objects and reasons, which provide ample justification for the decision of the Central Government for raising the threshold limit of ten lakh rupees to twenty lakh rupees. Petition dismissed.
|