Decided on July 20,2007



S.S. Parkar, J. (Chairperson) - (1.) SINCE both these appeals raise common question of law they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) A short question that arises in these appeals is whether the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the SRFAESI Act") would be applicable to the Co -operative Banks which are registered under the Maharashtra Co -operative Societies Act, 1960. The respondent bank which is a Co -operative Bank had initiated an action against the appellants under the provisions of Section 101 of the Maharashtra State Co -operative Societies Act, 1960 and got the recovery certificate issued thereunder. Thereafter the respondent bank took an action under the provisions of the SRFAESI Act against the appellants which was challenged by the appellants by filing an appeal/application under Section 17 of the SRFAESI Act in the D.R.T. Nagpur. During the pendency of said application, an application was made by the appellants to stay the said proceeding because the matter was pending before the Supreme Court in Transcore's case on the issue whether simultaneously two parallel remedies were available to a banking company i.e. to initiate a proceeding under the provisions of the RDDBFI Act and also under the provisions of the SRFAESI Act. According to the appellants the decision of the Apex Court on the question with regard to the initiation of the two parallel remedies would be relevant for the decision on the point raised in the matter by them. However, that application was rejected. The rejection of the said application has been impugned in this appeal.
(3.) THE learned Counsel appearing for the appellants relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Transcore v. Union of India, decided during the pendency of this appeal in this Tribunal which is reported in I . The view taken in that decision is that the SRFAESI Act is complementary to the provisions of the RDDBFI Act and therefore, the proceedings could be initiated under the provisions of both the Acts simultaneously and, therefore, that decision will not be relevant to decide the main issue raised in this appeal. However, on behalf of the appellants reliance is also placed on another judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Greater Bombay Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. United Yarn Tex. Pvt. Ltd. , in which it was held that the provisions of the RDDBFI Act are not applicable to Co -operative Banks. That view has been taken by the Supreme Court on the ground that the definition of 'Banking Company' under the provisions of Section 5(c) of the Banking Regulation Act has not been amended to include Co -operative Banks. Relying on the ratio of the said decision it is contended on behalf of the appellants that the provisions of the SRFAESI Act will also not be applicable to Co -operative Banks for the same reasons.;

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