SHRIJEE NUTRIENTS FOOD PVT LTD Vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Misc. appeal is filed by the appellants/original defendant Nos. 1 to 4, 6 and 7 being aggrieved by the order dated 4.7.2002 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Nagpur on Interlocutory Application No. 482 of 2002 in Original Application No. 316 of 2001. By the impugned order, the learned Presiding Officer dismissed the interlocutory application made by the appellants to stay the proceedings under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, pending in the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Nagpur till decision of the Special Civil Suit No. 1034 of 1996, pending on the file of Civil Judge (S.D.), Nagpur.

(2.) Few facts, which are required to be stated, are as follows:

(3.) I have heard Mr. Anoop Mohta for the appellants and Mr. Pankaj Kowali for the respondent No. 1. I have also gone through the proceedings including the impugned order and the case law cited by Mr. Mohta to support his argument that the learned Presiding Officer ought to have granted slay of the proceedings before him. After hearing both the advocates at length and after going through the material placed before me, I am of the opinion that the learned Presiding Officer has not committed any error as far as decision with respect to refusing stay of DRT proceedings is concerned. First of all, there is no provision of stay in the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'Act') like provisions of Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In fact, provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are not applicable to the DRT proceedings at all. Therefore, his observation to that extent cannot be faulted with.