TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 810X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jection dated 9th February, 2004, the aforestated Civil Revision Petition was filed before the High Court, but the said Civil Revision Petition was also rejected by the impugned order and therefore, this appeal has been filed. 2. The facts giving rise to the present litigation, in a nutshell, are as under: The appellant is a nationalized bank which had lent Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees eight lakh) to respondent no.1 by way of a term loan on certain conditions and so as to secure the said debt, respondent no.1 debtor had mortgaged his immovable property forming part of premises bearing no.C-8/298, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi. As respondent no.1 committed default in re-payment of the said loan, the appellant initiated proceedings under the provisions of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t that the subject matter of the suit i.e. the amount which was sought to be recovered by the appellant from respondent no.1 (original plaintiff) was less than Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten lakh) and according to the provisions of Section 1(4) of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the DRT Act'), the provisions of the DRT Act would not apply, where the amount of debt due to any bank or financial institution is less than Rs. 10 lakh and therefore, it was not open to the Debt Recovery Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") to entertain the matter as the amount claimed in the suit was less than Rs. 10 lakh. 6. In the aforestated circumstances, the trial Court was of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court under Order VII Rule 11 should have been granted by the trial Court. 10. So as to substantiate his submission, the learned counsel relied upon a judgment delivered in the case of Mardia Chemicals Ltd. and others v. Union of India and others 2004(4) SCC 311. For the aforestated reasons he submitted that the appeal deserved to be allowed and the impugned judgment should be set aside so that the Civil Court can be restrained from proceeding further with the suit on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. 11. Though served, nobody appeared for the respondents. 12. We have heard the learned counsel at length and also considered the relevant provisions of law referred to and the judgment cited by him. 13. The issue involved in the appeal i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no injunction shall be granted by any Court or other authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under this Act or under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (51 of 1993)." Section 1(4) of the DRT Act reads as under: "1. Short title, extent, commencement and application. - (1) ................. (2) ................. (3) ................. (4) The provisions of this Act shall not apply where the amount of debt due to any bank or financial institution or to a consortium of banks or financial institutions is less than ten lakh rupees or such other amount, being not less than one lakh rupees, as the Central Government may, by notification, specify." ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been challenged by respondent no.1 debtor before any Civil Court. 19. In the aforestated circumstances, the only remedy available to respondent no.1 debtor can be to approach the Tribunal under the provisions of the DRT Act read with the provisions of the Act. But, one would feel that as per Section 1(4) of the DRT Act, provisions of the DRT Act would not apply where the amount of debt is less than Rs. 10 lakh. 20. The aforestated provision of Section 1(4) of the DRT Act must be read in a manner which would not adversely affect a debtor, who wants to have some remedy against an action initiated under the provisions of Section 13 of the Act. 21. The DRT Act mainly pertains to institution of proceedings by a bank for recovery of its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal's original jurisdiction under the provisions of the DRT Act and the appellate jurisdiction under the Act. 24. The issue with regard to availability of a forum for challenging the action under the provisions of the Act had been dealt with by this Court in the case of Mardia Chemicals Ltd. (supra). This Court, in the said case, unequivocally held that the aggrieved debtor can never be without any remedy and we firmly believe that the legislature would normally not leave a person without any remedy when a harsh action against him is initiated under the provisions of the Act. 25. So as to know the appellate jurisdiction of the Tribunal, one has to look at the provisions of the Act as Section 17 of the Act specifically provides a right t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|