2019 (11) TMI 1741

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al at Kolkata DRT-III (hereinafter referred to as DRT-III). The petitioner, filed an application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) before the Learned DRT-III, against the opposite parties seeking, to recover a sum of Rs.1,80,32,125.50 (Rupees One Crore Eighty Lakh Thirty Two Thousand One Hundred Twenty Five and Paisa Fifty) only along with interest @14.25% per annum on and from December 12, 2015. The claim carried by the petitioner in the original application arose out of a loan sanctioned and disbursed by the petitioner at the request/instance of the principal borrowers, who were impleaded as defendant/opposite parties nos.1 to 4. The ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....owers. The loan amount made over by the petitioner to the opposite party no.6 was only on its specific undertaking not to sell the property to any other person without a prior written consent from the bank. According to the petitioner the defendant/opposite party no.6 was not at all authorized to sell the property or any portion thereof to anyone other than the principal borrowers. The petitioner also filed a complaint dated February 2, 2016 before the Indian Banks Association alleging such fraud. The opposite party No.6 filed an application before the DRT-III for deletion of its name from the original application and alternatively for cancellation of the afore-mentioned letter upon it securing the loan. The main grievance of the peti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ive such directions as may be necessary or expedient to give effect to its orders or to prevent abuse of its process or to secure the ends of justice yet, the Tribunal did not have the power to direct or to pass a mandatory order treating the letter dated February 2, 2016 written by the Bank to the Indian Banks Association in terms of the guide lines of the Reserve Bank of India as withdrawn. The learned advocate for the petitioner relies on an unreported decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Standard Chartered Bank - vs- Dharminder Bhohi & Ors., passed in a Civil Appeal No. 8486 of 2013. In the said decision it has been held that the power of the Tribunal was restricted to the four corners of the statute. In this case it i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....irlines Limited v. Union of India, reported in 2014 SCC Online Cal 19873, where the same principle was reiterated. He further relied on a decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the matter of ICICI Bank Limited v. The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, reported in 2011 (6) CTC 70, and submits that that the Debt Recovery Tribunal in order to secure the ends of justice had the power even to impound a passport and as such the order of DRTIII did not suffer from any illegality as the Tribunal has passed the order balancing the convenience of bothsides. He further submitted that the allegation of fraud was baseless as the loan was secured by his client. Admittedly the Debt Recovery Tribunal derives its power from the statute and the powe....