Mortgage-backed debt claims fall within DRT jurisdiction, with territorial venue governed by section 19 rather than section 16 CPC.

Mortgage-backed claims were treated as recoverable "debt" under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, so the Debt Recovery Tribunal could entertain substantive mortgage relief in section 19 proceedings, including transferred matters under section 31. The Tribunal was said to apply substantive mortgage law under the Transfer of Property Act while proceeding summarily under section 22, without being controlled by the Code of Civil Procedure. Territorial jurisdiction was held to depend on section 19(1)(a) to (c), based on residence, business, or part of the cause of action, rather than the situs of immovable property under section 16 CPC; an ad interim ex parte order was also held unsustainable to the extent challenged.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Debt Recovery Tribunal has jurisdiction under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 to entertain a substantive claim involving mortgage relief in a proceeding under section 19, including pending matters transferred under section 31; (ii) Whether, in such proceedings, territorial jurisdiction is governed by section 19(1)(a) to (c) of the Act rather than section 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and whether the impugned ad interim ex parte order could stand.

Issue (i): Whether the Debt Recovery Tribunal has jurisdiction under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 to entertain a substantive claim involving mortgage relief in a proceeding under section 19, including pending matters transferred under section 31.

Analysis: The expression "debt" in section 2(g) was read broadly to include any liability, whether secured or unsecured, and the Act's object was identified as speedy recovery of debts and enforcement of securities. The mortgage was treated as an accessory security for the debt and not as a separate cause that would exclude the Tribunal's jurisdiction. The Tribunal was held not to be bound by the Code of Civil Procedure and, in the absence of any specific exclusion, could apply the substantive law of mortgage under the Transfer of Property Act while proceeding summarily under section 22. The right to recover a mortgage debt was therefore held to fall within the Tribunal's jurisdiction under section 19.

Conclusion: The Tribunal does have jurisdiction to entertain mortgage-based relief in a section 19 proceeding, including transferred pending matters, and the answer is in favour of the respondents.

Issue (ii): Whether, in such proceedings, territorial jurisdiction is governed by section 19(1)(a) to (c) of the Act rather than section 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and whether the impugned ad interim ex parte order could stand.

Analysis: Since the proceeding under the Act remains a recovery proceeding for debt and not a suit for land, territorial jurisdiction was held to depend on section 19(1)(a) to (c), namely residence, business, or part of the cause of action, rather than the situs of immovable property under section 16 of the Code. The judgment also held that the Tribunal had no authority to pass the ad interim ex parte order impugned in one of the matters, and that part of the order was set aside. Other connected orders were sustained, modified, or left to proceed in accordance with law.

Conclusion: Territorial jurisdiction is governed by section 19(1)(a) to (c) of the Act, and the ad interim ex parte order was unsustainable to the extent set aside, in part in favour of the petitioners.

Final Conclusion: The judgment affirmed the Debt Recovery Tribunal's competence to adjudicate mortgage-linked claims within recovery proceedings, while correcting specific procedural orders where necessary and otherwise allowing the connected matters to proceed.

Ratio Decidendi: A mortgage-backed claim for recovery of money remains a claim for "debt" under the Act, and the Tribunal may decide it summarily under section 19 read with section 22, applying the substantive mortgage law without being controlled by section 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

---