LAKSHMAN BALARAMAN Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is filed under article 227 of the Constitution of India, by the third respondent in Transferred Application No. 100 of 1996, on the file of the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Madras. The respondent herein filed C.S. No. 852 of 1989 on the original side of this court. When the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 came into force, the suit was transferred before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, and was numbered as Transferred Application No. 100 of 1996.

(2.) THE respondent filed the suit against the defendant for recovery of more than Rs. 21 lakhs and interest at quarterly rests, and for consequential reliefs. From the body of the plaint, it could be seen that the first defendant-company availed of financial assistance in the nature of term loan and cash credit facilities, as per application dated January 19, 1985. THE same was sanctioned by the respondent as per sanction letter dated December 30, 1985.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the revision petitioner reiterated the contentions that were raised before the Tribunal. LEARNED counsel submitted that the loan was granted under two different documents and it was also sanctioned in two different years. Therefore, both these transactions cannot be clubbed together and a demand cannot be made for more than Rs. 21 lakhs, so as to invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. LEARNED counsel relied on rule 10 of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993.As against the said contention, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that rule 10 has to be read along with section 31 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, which deals with "transfer of pending cases". LEARNED counsel also submitted that even under rule 10, there is an exception, and the case on hand comes under that exception. LEARNED counsel also submitted that the cause of action referred to in rule 10 should not be strictly construed as is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner.