JUDGEMENT
A. Subbulakshmy, J.(Chairperson) -
(1.)THE appellant has preferred the appeal as against the decree on the basis of the Compromise Memo filed by both parties. THE Office of this Tribunal has raised the question as to how the appeal is maintainable since Sub-section (2) of Section 20 of the RDBD & FI Act states that "No appeal shall lie to the appellate Tribunal from an order made by a Tribunal with the consent of the parties."
(2.)Today, the matter has been heard on the question of maintainability of the appeal. Both the parties have signed the Compromise Memo and filed the Compromise Memo before the DRT-II, Chennai. Counsel for the appellants submits that the defendants have signed only in the last page of the Compromise Memo and they have not signed in the 1st and 2nd page and only the Counsel for the applicant and defendants have signed in the 1 st and 2nd page and in the last page only all the defendants and the Counsels for both parties have signed and the 1 st and 2nd page conditions are not known to the defendants and without knowing the contents of the 2nd page, only on seeing the last page the defendants have signed the Compromise Memo and the Compromise was obtained by fraudulent means and so the Compromise decree is not binding on the defendants and so the appeal is maintainable and the matter is not compromised as per the Compromise Memo filed. Of course, only in the last page all the defendants and the Counsel for both parties have signed. In Pages 1 and 2 only, Counsels for both the parties have signed and the defendants have not signed.
On a perusal of the Order passed by the PO, DRT, it is seen that the case itself was fixed only for recording of the compromise and Counsel for both the parties filed Compromise Memo stating that a decree for Recovery Certificate may be issued for full amount as claimed in the petition including interest and costs and, however, some conditions in making payments by way of instalments have been incorporated in the Memo of Compromise and the Memo of Compromise is signed by Counsels for both parties in each and every page and also accepted and agreed upon by the defendant Company. The PO, DRT, has found that the Memo of Compromise seems to be in order. In para 2 of the Order, the PO, DRT, has recorded that Counsel for the defendants also stated that the terms and conditions contained in the Memo have been explained to the defendant Company and they have given their voluntary consent for accepting the same. The terms and conditions of the Memo of Compromise are set out in that Order. Accordingly the PO, DRT has allowed the OA in terms of the Memo of Compromise and has ordered for issue of necessary Recovery Certificate in terms of the Compromise Memo.
(3.)ON a perusal of the Order passed by the PO, DRT, it is evident that the Counsel for the defendants also stated that the terms and conditions contained in the Memo of compromise have been explained to the defendant Company and they have given their voluntary consent for accepting the same. Further, in page 3 of the Compromise Memo where the defendants have also signed, it is specifically stated with regard to the conditions set out in page 2 of the Compromise Memo. It is stated in the last page 3 of the Compromise Memo in Paragraphs 3 to 5 that "In the event of payment of Rs. 2,10,00,000/- as per Clause (2) above the entire claim to the Bank shall stand fully discharged under this application and in the event of default in any of the payments in Clause (2), the entire decree amount under Clause (1) shall become payable including interest and costs, after deducting any amount that might have been paid by the respondents and the parties request that the compromise memo may be recorded by the Tribunal and the Decree/Recovery Certificate may be duly passed in terms of the compromise." The paragraphs set out in the last page of the Compromise Memo where the defendants have also signed, had clearly set out all the conditions. So, now it is futile on the part of the defendants to contend that they were not aware of the conditions and the Compromise Memo has been obtained fraudulently.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.