AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anil Kumar Srivastava, Chairperson
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
I.A. 54 of 2023
This application is moved by the Appellant with a prayer for issuance of show cause as to why the Authorised Officer of the Bank should not be appropriately dealt with for deliberate and willful violation of the judgment and order dated 31st August, 2022 and further for a mandatory injunction directing the Authorised Officer to forthwith make the payment as per the judgment of the DRAT, Kolkata dated 31st August, 2022.
Appeal No. 85 of 2017 against the judgment of Debts Recovery Tribunal-1, Kolkata passed in S.A. 09 of 2015 was allowed vide order dated 31st August, 2022 wherein direction was issued to Respondents No. 1 and 2 to refund Rs.1.95 crore to the Appellant with interest at the rate applicable to the FDR of the Bank. Now, by moving the instant I.A., Appellant wants that this Appellate Tribunal should execute its own order. It is settled legal proposition that DRT has jurisdiction to execute the order passed by the DRT or DRAT, as the case may be. Hence I do not find any ground for issuance of any further direction to the Respondents.
Further, Learned Counsel for the Appellant prays for issuance of notice of contemp. No specific provision could be shown wherein notice of contempt can be issued in a matter where appeal is allowed and the Bank has not complied the orders. Legal provisions are there for execution of the order. Hence, I do not find any merit in the instant application. Accordingly, I.A. 54 of 2023 is dismissed.
The instant Misc. Application Diary No. 575 of 2022 has been filed for correction in the judgment dated 31st August, 2022 wherein in the 4th line of paragraph 3 wherein in place of “Appellant No. 1” the word “Respondent No. 2” should be written and instead of “287.00” Rs.287.00 be inserted. These are typographical mistakes which need to be corrected.
As far as correction in 2nd and 3rd lines of paragraph 11 is concerned, such correction would relate back to the merits of the matter and are not in the nature of typographical error. Accordingly, this prayer is declined.
Accordingly the misc. application to this extent is allowed and necessary corrections are made today.
The Misc. Application Diary No. 575 of 2022, accordingly is disposed of.