B.K. MODI Vs. STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR AND ORS.
LAWS(DR)-2014-11-2
DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on November 17,2014

B.K. Modi Appellant
VERSUS
State Bank Of Bikaner And Jaipur And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Ranjit Singh, J. (Chairperson) - (1.) APPELLANTS Mr. B.K. Modi and Mr. V.K. Modi were impleaded as Defendant No. 3 and Defendant No. 2 in Original Application No. 25/2012 filed by the five different Banks, namely, State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, State Bank of India, State Bank of Patiala, Canara Bank and Punjab National Bank. When the case had reached the stage of final hearing in the year 2007, it had to be adjourned on a few occasions as regular Presiding Officer was not available. The appellants had even filed written submissions before the Tribunal. Subsequently, however, the appellants had moved various applications containing different prayers. The appellant B.K. Modi has moved four different applications i.e. I.As. Nos. 13/2014, 14/2014, 15/2014 making a prayer to reject the affidavit dated 20th October, 2013 through which additional documents were filed by State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur with a further prayer to direct the Bank to place on record the complete statement of record in terms of the order passed on 22nd November, 2012. I.A. Nos. 14 and 15 both of 2014 were filed seeking direction to Punjab National Bank and State Bank of Patiala respectively to produce the original ledger pertaining to the transaction involved in the O.A. and to hold that the statement of account filed was not in compliance with the provisions of the Bankers' Book Evidence Act. The said appellant had earlier filed I.A. No. 24/2010 seeking permission to cross -examine the witness of the Bank whereas appellant V.K. Modi had filed I.A. No. 340/2010 praying same relief of cross -examination of Banks' witnesses. Appellant V.K. Modi like the other appellant has also filed I.A. No. 16/2014 seeking direction to State Bank of India to produce original ledger and to hold that statement of account filed is not in consonance with the provisions of the Banker's Books Evidence Act. Said appellant has filed I.A. Nos. 320/14, 321/2014, 322/2014 and 323/2014 for issuing direction to State Bank of India. Punjab National Bank, State Bank of Patiala and State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur to produce original in relation to the accounts.
(2.) THE Tribunal below has taken up all the above noted I. As. filed by the appellants and has disposed of these applications by a common order dated 14th July, 2014 against which the present two Appeals (Nos. 301/2014 and 302/2014) have been filed by both the appellants referred to above respectively. Kotak Mahindra Bank, an assignee of State Bank of Patiala, had also filed an application (I.A. No. 120/14) praying for grant of permission to cross -examine the witnesses produced by the appellants, Though all the three application (two filed by the appellants and one by Kotak Mahindra Bank) seeking permission to cross -examine the witnesses have been dismissed by the Tribunal, but KMB has not filed any Appeal in this regard whereas the appellant have filed the Appeals to impugn that part of the order as well. It appears that when the cases were ripe for final disposal and so was fixed in the year 2007 -08, but an order came to be passed by the Tribunal below requiring the Banks to file revised statement of account in terms of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Central Bank of India v. Ravindra, : I (2002) BC 150 (SC) : VII (2001) SLT 400 : IV (2001) CLT 127 (SC) : AIR 2001 SC 3095. This order was passed on 22nd November, 2012 and that is how the issue which was ripe for decision in the O.A. has been reopened and all the above noted applications were filed. The end result is that the O.A. which was filed on 12th February, 2002 against Modi Stone Limited, which is the principal borrower, is still pending adjudication.
(3.) THIS is a case where members of consortium had advanced credit facilities to Modi Stone Ltd. and O.A. was filed for recovery of Rs. 38,89,20,229.05 with interest and cost against all the defendants including the appellants who are guarantors. The company statedly is under liquidation.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.