National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation Of India Ltd. vs Bank Of Maharashtra And Ors.

Ranjit Singh, J

National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. has filed these seven appeals, six out of which are against order dated 9.6.2015 passed by DRT-I, Delhi in different O.As. filed by various Banks. One appeal is filed against an order dated 16.3.2015 passed by DRT-II, Delhi, whereby the O.A. filed by Bank of Maharashtra was decided. The details of the O.A. filed by different Banks and the amount claimed are as under-

The above-noted claims filed by different Banks were allowed on account of admission made by the appellant in regard to its liability towards these different Banks. The Tribunal has noticed that admission made by the appellant is unambiguous and unequivocal and has accordingly allowed the O.As. and issued R.Cs: Still, the appellant felt aggrieved against these orders and has preferred these seven appeals.

The admission in all the cases, except in O.A. filed by Bank of Maharashtra was contained in the written statement. In the case of O.A. filed by Bank of Maharashtra, however, an application (I.A. No. 898/2014) for passing a judgment on the basis of admission was made. The appellant had not specifically denied the claim made in the O.A. and, instead, had given details of the steps taken by them to liquidate the dues of various creditors. The Tribunal, after making reference to the case of Uttam Singh Duggal & Company Ltd. v. United Bank of India & Ors., VI (2000) SLT 87 : AIR 2000 SC 2740, has observed that where the claim is admitted, the Court has jurisdiction to render a judgment and pass a decree. Finding there was an admission of claim in the written statement, the claim made in the O.A. was allowed on the basis of admission in the balance sheet.

Even before this Tribunal, the Counsel for the appellant had simply pleaded that the appellant had every intention to pay but was praying for time in view of the difficulty on its part to discharge the liability. Notice in the appeals as well as in the applications seeking condonation of delay and wavier of the requirement of pre-deposit was issued. Thereafter, the Counsel for the appellant had been seeking time on the ground that the Government is in the process of advancing some money to the appellant to pay off liability which had been fastened on the appellant, which is co-operative marketing federation. On a number of dates, time was allowed to the appellant on this ground. Even today, the prayer is for an adjournment on the ground that the Government has called a meeting of the stake-holders on 27.1.2016 for the purpose of one-time settlement.

I am of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping these appeals pending as no adjudication on merit is prayed for. The claims of the Banks have been allowed on admissions. The appellant has not discharged the liability and has been seeking time only to make payment. If the Government is taking steps to resolve this issue by one-time settlement, the order passed in these appeals would certainly have no effect on the action being considered by the Government. Since the appellant have not sought any adjudication on merits in these appeals there is hardly any need to spend these appeals because the Government is taking steps for one-time settlement. Pendency of these appeals or their disposal cannot have any effect on the rights of the parties to enter into one-time settlement. Since the claims in the O.As. have been allowed on the basis of admission, strictly speaking, these appeals may not even be maintainable in terms of Section 20(2) of the RDDBFI Act. I am, thus, not inclined to keep these appeals pending by granting further adjournment in these cases. Needless to observe that the order passed in the present appeals would hardly have any effect on the proposed action of settlement initiated by the Government.

There is otherwise no merit in the appeals and these are accordingly dismissed. Since the appeals are being dismissed, no orders are called for on applications seeking condonation of delay as well as on the waiver applications and these applications shall stand closed.