HDFC BANK LTD Vs. VASUDEO SHRIPAD BELVALKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which arises for consideration is whether in view of the facts of the case, claim for refund of security deposit (given against the licensed premises) by the Bank in the proceedings before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under the provisions of the Recovery of the Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the 'said Act' for short), can be said to be a "debt" due and recoverable by the Bank from the respondents, under Section 19 of the said Act.

(2.) Facts of the case :

(3.) It is the petitioner's case that, respondents are the owners of office premises on the second floor of a building known as "Netrali Apartments" at Pune ('said premises" for short). The petitioners and the respondents entered into a Leave and License Agreement dated 27th November, 1998 whereby the respondents granted unto the petitioners, a license to use and occupy the office premises in the said building. Besides, the parties entered into a deposit agreement in the month of December, 1998. The respondents thus, have received Rs. 37,67,731/- as and by way of refundable security deposit against the license granted unto the petitioners to occupy the said premises.