AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
J.M. Malik, J. (Chairperson)
u/s 21 of the RDDBFI Act, I directed the Appellant to deposit 25% of the debt due i.e. Rs. 56,43,881.35 p. as shown in the recovery certificate minus pendente lite and future interest and costs without prejudice to the rights of the parties within four weeks. The said amount was deposited. On 7th July, 2009 I decided the abovesaid case on merits. The relevant para 25 runs as follows:
In the light of the above, I, hereby, remand the case to the learned Debts Recovery Tribunal with direction to the Appellants to file written statement on 17th August, 2009 for which no other opportunity shall be granted. This will be the last opportunity. The Appellants are debarred from taking the first three objections which have already been decided vide this judgment. They can set up the points regarding limitation. The case is an old one and it is expected that the Debts Recovery Tribunal will dispose off this case expeditiously.
Aggrieved by that order a writ was preferred before the Hon''ble High Court. The Hon''ble High Court vide order dated 17th August, 2009 dismissed the writ petition. Thereafter, a review petition was filed before the High Court. The High Court permitted the Defendants to raise the abovementioned three points. The Hon''ble High Court further directed the Trial Court to frame issues.
In the meantime, the Appellant has moved an application for withdrawal of amount deposited in compliance of condition u/s 21 of RDDBFI Act, 1993. The learned Counsel for the Appellant pointed out that since no amount has been determined by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, therefore, the money already deposited by him should be returned to the applicant. On the other hand, the Counsel for the Respondent bank vehemently argued that the appeal has been partly allowed and the recovery certificate is still pending.
I see no force in the arguments urged by the Counsel for the Respondent bank. Till now no amount stands determined against the Appellant. He cannot be asked to pay the amount to the bank without any adjudication. However, prima facie, it appears that some money is to be paid by the Appellant to the bank. It is, therefore, ordered that the amount already deposited be returned to the Appellant along with interest within 45 days after receipt of this order subject to the undertaking given by the Appellant on a requisite stamp-paper to the effect that in case the recovery order is passed against him he would deposit this amount with the Court within fifteen days after the announcement of the order by the learned D.R.T. In the meantime, the learned D.R.T. is directed to decide this case expeditiously. The learned D.R.T. has not adhered to the directions already given in this respect. If necessary, the case may be taken up on day-to-day basis because this is one of the old cases. Application stands disposed off.