HC held that Sections 17 and 18 of the RDB Act confer exclusive...

HC held that Sections 17 and 18 of the RDB Act confer exclusive jurisdiction on the DRT to entertain bank recovery applications and bar all other courts, including in pending suits, and that Section 31 must be purposively read subject to that bar. The court concluded that a monetary claim assigned to a bank falls within the definition of "debt" under Section 2(g). Consequently, following the amalgamation of the original plaintiff into the present plaintiff bank, the subject suit fell within DRT jurisdiction and the trial court correctly transferred the matter to the DRT. The petition challenging transfer was dismissed with no order as to costs.

---