AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL:
Heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellant Mr. Aritra Kumar Roy(virtual) and Mr. S. Pal Chowdhury, Learned Counsel for the Respondents and perused the records.
Instant appeal is preferred against the judgement dated 08.08.2025 passed by the Learned DRT-I Kolkata, where by Learned DRT dismissed the O.A. holding that the investment of the Applicant bank with preferences shares of defendant company is not a debt. Hence the application of the applicant bank before this tribunal is not maintainable, although, liberty was also granted to the applicant bank to move the appropriate form before civil court for appropriate remedy.
Feeling aggrieved, appellant bank preferred the appeal.
As per pleadings of the parties, O.A. No. 123 of 2007 was filed by the appellant bank against the respondents for issuance of a decree of Rs. 55,01,94,380/-. Pending O.A., notices were issued to the defendants which were served and when the defendants did not put in appearance, O.A. was decided ex-parte on 28.09.2022. Thereafter, M.A. No. 12 of 2022 was filed by the defendants for setting aside the ex-parte judgement dated 28.09.2022 wherein the appellant bank i.e. Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited also put in appearance. After hearing the Learned Counsel for the parties, Mr. Sudip pal Chowdhury and Mr. K. Patra for the respondents herein i.e. Industrial Investment Bank of India Limited and Mr. Aritra Kumar Roy, for the Appellant herein Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited, Learned DRT allowed the M.A. No. 12 of 2022 and set aside the ex-parte order dated 21.06.2022 and ex-parte judgement dated 28.09.2022 and restored the O.A. 123 of 2007 to its original number, vide judgment and order dated 03.04.2024. Thereafter, O.A. was heard by the Learned DRT and was dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 08.08.2025.
Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgement, Appellants preferred the appeal.
At the very outset, Learned Counsel for the appellant would submit that the O.A. filed by the Appellants were dismissed without getting a single rupee.
Per Contra Learned Counsel for the respondents would submit that all the ground taken in the memo of appeal are false and are against the records, hence, the appeal is liable to be allowed.
This is a peculiar matter wherein we found it appropriate that the grounds taken by the appellants challenging the impugned order should be reproduced.
GROUNDS:
i.For that the Learned Tribunal below wrongly and without authority passed the judgment dated 08.08.2025 rejecting the Original Application of the Appellant.
ii.For that the Learned Tribunal below did not have any power and authority to pass the successive judgment dated 08.08.2025 once the judgment was passed on 03.04.2025 in merits considering the documents like written statement of the Respondent and others available in the records.
iii.For that the judgment dated 08.08.2025 was changed/modified on the strength of an Application u/s. 22(2)(g) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 filed by the Respondent, which is bad in law.
iv.For that the Learned below Tribunal has changed/modified the earlier judgment by the judgment dated 08.08.2025 without any Review/Recall Application with the relevant pleadings filed by the Respondent.
v.For that the ex-parte order was not vacated before the judgment pronounced and no application of recalling the ex-parte order was filed by the Respondent before the judgment was passed by the Learned Debts Recovery Tribunal-1, Kolkata.
vi.For that the Learned below Tribunal grossly erred in considering the debt of the Respondent towards the Appellant.
vii.For that the Learned below Tribunal grossly erred by not applying the mind that the judgment dated 28.09.2022 could be challenged by filing an Appeal before the Hon'ble Appellant Tribunal.
viii.For that the Impugned Judgment dated 08.08.2025 under challenge has been passed in favour of the Respondent under liquidation not represented by the liquidator.
Perusal of the grounds of appeal would reflect that the appellants have in nowhere challenged the impugned judgment on merits, rather the only ground is that the ex-parte order was not set aside before passing the impugned judgement which is apparently wrong and false grounds taken by the appellants. Ex-parte judgement dated 28.09.2022 was recalled by the Learned DRT in M.A. No. 12 of 2022 vide order dated 03.04.2024. It appears that the appellants are trying to mislead this appellate tribunal by taking a false ground which is totally against the records. M.A. No. 12 of 2022 was allowed by the appellant bank i.e. Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited in Para 4 of the Judgment of M.A. 12 of 2022, it is recorded that the Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited has filed objection to the miscellaneous application. This judgement dated 03.04.2024 in M.A. 12 of 2022 is not challenged by the appellants and attained finality. When the ex-parte judgment was set aside in presence of the appellants herein, how they can be permitted to take a false ground on affidavit sworn in by one Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Senior Manager of the Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited presently posted at Branch Office, Malick Bazar, Kolkata.
Another ground taken in (iii) that the judgment dated 08.08.2025 was changed/modified on the strength of an application under Section 22(2)(g) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 filed by the Respondents, which too is not in accordance with law as the ex-parte judgment was already set aside by the Learned DRT.
None of the ground related to the merits of the matter. Impugned judgment was challenged on the ground which could not be substantiated on record. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the appeal is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.
O R D E R
Appeal is dismissed. Judgment and order dated 08.08.2025 passed by Learned DRT-I Kolkata in O.A. No. 123 of 2007 (The Jammu and Kashmir bank Limited -vs- Industrial Investment Bank of India Limited) is confirmed.
File be consigned to Record room.
Copy of the Judgment/Final Order be uploaded in the Tribunal's Website.
Order signed, dated and pronounced in open Court.