R INDRANI Vs. CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellants are defendants 2 and 4 in the Original Application (OA). THE appellants filed IA 227/2001 directing the Tribunal to reject the OA as the same is against Rule 10 of the DRT (Procedure) Rules under the RDDB & FI Act, 1993. According to the appellants, they are the partners of D6 Firm and they retired from the partnership firm on 20.1.1997 and they are not liable for this claim as they retired from the partnership and they are only the erstwhile partners of the D6 Firm. THE appellants further contend that the OA is filed as against the loan availed by D1 and D6 Firms and the two loans cannot be clubbed together in one OA and for the two loan transactions one OA filed is not maintainable and it is hit by Rule 10 of the Act. THE appellants further contend that only if the two reliefs are clubbed together the jurisdiction of the DRT can be moved and the amount will exceed Rs. 10 lakhs and if a Suit is filed on each transaction for the loan of D1 and D6 separately, those Suits will not come under this RDDB & FI Act and the jurisdiction only lies before the Civil Court and so on these grounds the OA is not maintainable and thus the appellants seek for rejection of the OA as against them.

(2.) Counsel for the appellants submits that only to invoke the jurisdiction of the DRT the two loans are clubbed together and thus enhancing the claim to more than Rs. 10 lakhs the OA has been filed before the DRT. He further submitted that the claim due to D6 loan is only Rs. 6 lakhs and odd and D2 and D4 are the partners of D6 Finn alone and in such case the clubbing of two claims is not maintainable and D2 and D4 are not at all liable for the claim since they also retired from the partnership of the D6 Firm and the two loans are not consequential to each other. Counsel for the respondent Bank submitted that the D1 Firm availed the loan. D1 is the proprietary Concern and D1 availed the loan by mortgaging his property and the same D1 is also one of the partners of the D6 Firm and D6 Firm also availed loan from the Bank and for both these loans. D1's property has been mortgaged to the Bank and since the same property has been mortgaged to both loans, two separate Suits cannot be filed in respect of the same properly and sale of the property cannot be brought in respect of the same property in two Suits and so both the loans are clubbed and a single OA is filed before the DRT as they are consequential to each other. Rule 10 reads as follows.

(3.) UNDER such circumstances, I hold that the OA filed before the DRT is maintainable.