Skip to content

Drat Delhi Court September 2005 Judgments

Sep 22 2005

State Bank of India Vs. Sree PorcelaIn P. Ltd. and ors.

Court: DRAT Delhi

Decided on: Sep-22-2005

Reported in: IV(2005)BC201

1. This appeal is directed against the order made by the DRT, Jaipur, on June 19, 2001, on an application filed under Section 19(7) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, seeking issuance of recovery certificate enabling the applicant-bank, for pursuing appropriate remedy thereafter.2. The State Bank of India instituted a suit for recovery of certain amounts on November 9, 1983, before the District Court at Alwar. A preliminary decree was passed on February 13, 1986, against the defendants with certain condition. However, when the conditions of preliminary decree were not complied with by the defendants, a final decree was passed on November 9, 1993. While so, the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short "the RDB Act") came to be enacted, and pursuant to which the DRT was established at Jaipur, which started functioning from August 30, 1994. When the DRT at Jaipur started functioning, the applicant-bank moved a...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 2005

Prestolite of India Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union Bank of India

Court: DRAT Delhi

Decided on: Sep-15-2005

Reported in: I(2006)BC68

1. An interesting question of law is raised in this appeal on behalf of the appellants on the competence of a Presiding Officer to permit a Recovery Officer to decide the objections raised at the time of issuance of a recovery certificate.2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Counsel for the respondent Bank.3. From the narration of facts, it would appear that initially a suit in OS No. 350 of 1981 was filed in the Court of the Additional Sub-Judge, Faridabad. A compromise decree has been passed on 15.11.1991. However, the defendants seem to have initiated execution proceedings before the said Civil Court against the respondent-Bank alleging that the respondent-Bank has violated certain terms of the consent decree made on 15.11.1991. The said execution proceedings seems to be still pending before the Civil Court.4. After the enactment of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, the suit pending before the Civil Cour...

Tag this Judgment!

  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

Save Judgments · Add Notes · Store Search Results · Organize Client Files

Start your Free Trial