K.S.Kumaran, - (1.)RESPONDENT-State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent-Bank') filed O.A. 200/2001 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Delhi-II (hereinafter referred to as 'the DRT) against the appellants herein (who were defendants 1 to 3, 5 and 6, respectively; hereinafter referred to as 'the appellants/defendants') and Anil Kumar Gupta (4th defendant) for the recovery of Rs. 1,38,81,986.66 with interest and costs.
(2.)The learned Presiding Officer of the DRT passed the final order dated 29.4.2002, directing the appellants/defendants to pay the said amount with interest and costs, but dismissed the O.A. as against the 4th defendant. The learned Presiding Officer of the DRT observed that the defendants, in spite of numerous opportunities, did not file the written statement and, therefore, they are deemed to have admitted the averments in the O.A. and held that the respondent-Bank is entitled to the Recovery Certificate, as indicated above. The appellants/defendants then filed a Miscellaneous Application to set aside the final order, but the learned Presiding Officer of the DRT dismissed their application by the impugned order dated 5.7.2002. Aggrieved, the defendants 1 to 3, 5 and 6 have come forward with this appeal. The respondent-Bank has filed a suitable reply opposing the appeal.
I have heard the learned Counsels for both the sides, and perused the records.

(3.)BEFORE I proceed to consider the rival contentions, I will first set out the details of certain dates and orders passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the DRT, which, ultimately, led to the passing of the final order.