BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD Vs. JEEWAN RICE AND ALLIED INDUSTRIES PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD arguments of both the sides, and perused the records.

(2.) It is conceded by both the sides that the learned Presiding Officer of the DRT had considered only the question of limitation, and dismissed the said application without going into the merits of the contentions raised by either side. The learned Counsel for the respondents 2 and 3 states that apart from the question of limitation, respondents 2 and 3 had raised some other contentions also, and they have not been considered.

(3.) THOUGH a contention was raised by the learned Counsel for the appellant that in this matter the appellant-Bank had already commenced the execution proceedings, it is also the case of the appellant herein that, that fact cannot in any way stand in the way of the appellant seeking the issuance of the Recovery Certificate. Because, the words "has not been executed" found in Section 31A of the Act have to be interpreted to mean that the decree has not been executed in full and the amount thereunder has not been realised. It is not the case of the respondents 2 and 3 that any amount was realised. The learned Counsel for the appellant states that an execution petition was filed before the Civil Court for the attachment sale of the movables, but, the said application was transferred to the DRT where no amount was realised at all. According to him, even this execution petition, which was transferred to the DRT, was tagged on to the application filed for the issuance of the Recovery Certificate.