Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J. - (1.) The concerned bank obtained a decree against the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner preferred an appeal before this court and obtained an order of conditional stay. This order of stay of execution of the decree has since been vacated. In the meantime, the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, has come into operation.
(2.) The execution proceeding pending before the civil court was transferred before the Tribunal in accordance with the provisions of the said Act of 1993. A notice has been published in the newspaper appearing at page 66 of the writ petition. The said notice of the Recovery Officer has been impugned in this writ petition inter alia, on the following grounds: (i) Since an appeal is pending in this court, the bank is not entitled to enforce the decree by way of execution. (ii) Since the decretal amount is Rs. 49 lakhs odd the Recovery Officer is not entitled to consider the application of the bank for any sum in excess of the decretal amount.
(3.) Learned counsel, appearing for the writ petitioner has drawn my attention to section 31A of the said Act of 1993. I have carefully examined the said two sections. Since there is no stay granted by the court of appeal, in my view, mere pendency of the appeal cannot preclude the bank from initiating recovery proceeding in accordance with the provision of the said Act of 1993. Section 31A(1) empowers the bank to have the decree of the civil court executed through the recovery proceedings in terms of the said provision. Section 31 has not put any embargo with regard to such recovery proceeding.;