- (1.) In all these writ petitions the writ petitioners have come to this Court aggrieved of the order passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as DRAT) dismissing the appeal arising out of the the order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal Jabalpur (hereinafter referred to as DRT) dated 18.04.2013, on an application filed on behalf of the petitioner, during the course of the proceedings which are pending before the DRT in relation to a claim of the respondent under Section 20 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.
(2.) In these proceedings after reply was filed by the Bank, wherein they claimed renovation of contract with respect to the loss sustained by the bank towards derivative transactions and also claimed that fresh sanction was awarded in favour of the petitioners with respect respect to certain additional liabilities and relied upon some documents alleged to have been executed in favour of the bank. The petitioners sought production of certain documents vide application dated January, 2013. The said application reads as under: - "Application on behalf of defendants praying for production of covering sanction letter to Annexure I, produced alongwith rejoinder which is at page 16. To, The Hon'ble Presiding Officer, Hon'ble Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur (M.P.) May this please to your Lordship Most Respectfully showeth; 1. Applicant bank in para 3 of rejoinder has stated that "for availing Forex Derivative Transactions the company was required to submit request letters coupled with an undertaking for the same from time to time. A copy of one such letter/undertaking and sanction granted by the bank pursuant thereto are enclosed herewith as cumulatively marked as Exhibit A/49." 2. Exhibit A/49 starts from page 14 and ends at page 17 of the rejoinder. Page 14 and 15 is a letter by Company. Page 16 is Annexure I which is part of sanction by bank pursuant to said letter. Covering to sanction letter has not been placed on record by the bank.
(3.) Defendants respectfully submit that what is there in the covering letter and why bank is hiding the said covering letter. 6. In the circumstances bank may be directed to produce the covering letter to sanction letter which is at page 16. 7. That the issue pertaining to sanction of forward and derivative contracts limit is very important issue since entire recovery/claim sought by the bank is alleged loss sustained by the bank in forward and derivative transactions. 8. Instant is bonafide application. An affidavit in support of this application is being filed herewith." However the bank denied production of the documents and therefore the petitioners approached the DRT and then DRAT, but without success. 3. HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion that the documents sought to be produced by the petitioners are relevant for the purpose of deciding the controversy between the parties as far as claim of the bank is concerned. We therefore direct the respondent//bank to produce all those documents of which production has been sought in the aforesaid application on affidavit, if they are in their possession as they are certainly relevant with respect to the controversy involved between the parties within a period of two weeks before the DRT, with an advance copy to the counsel for the petitioners. In case the documents are not with them, they should come out with specific plea that the documents are not in their possession. If the respondent/bank does not wish to file any documents then the respondent/bank should specify the reasons and file an affidavit in this regard under Order 11 Rule 21 CPC.;