Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2002 (3) TMI 817

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a suit in O.S. No. 4300 of 1988 on the file of the City Civil Judge, Bangalore, against the petitioner and others for recovery of certain amounts alleged to have been due from them. The suit came to be transferred to the Tribunal in terms of section 31 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short, "the Act"). After transfer the suit was numbered as O.A. No. 1012 of 1995. 3. The bank stated in the plaint that three different types of credit facilities were made available to the petitioners. Several loan transactions were clubbed by the bank in the suit. An application was filed under rule 10 of the Rules before the Tribunal by the second petitioner. The said application came to be dismissed by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . 15141 of 1998. 8. Per contra counsel for the bank supports the order and also argues that the petition is not to be entertained in view of an appeal remedy under the Act. 9. After hearing the parties on either side the following order is passed. 10. The facts of the case would reveal that a suit came to be transferred to the Tribunal under section 31 of the Act. The bank has filed an affidavit by way of evidence. The petitioners filed an application seeking for an order to examine the witness of the bank in view of the desire of the petitioner to cross-examine the witness of the bank. The Tribunal in the case on hand has rejected I.A. No. 5 filed by the petitioner and I.A. No. 6 also was dismissed in view of the decision of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... be given by way of an affidavit. In the case on hand the petitioner desired to cross-examine the witness, and in such circumstances the Tribunal could not have rejected the request of the petitioners and could not have accepted the evidence by way of affidavit in the light of rule 12(6) of the Rules. 11. In this connection it is pertinent to refer to a judgment of this court in W.P. No. 15141 of 1998 in which this court in para 11.7 has ruled categorically as under : "So far as acceptance of affidavit of witness is concerned, even though the first part of sub-rule (6) of rule 12 of the rules permits the parties to prove the fact or facts by way of affidavit or evidence of the witnesses, the proviso to the said rule impose a bar on the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dence. Section 14 of the Divorce Act, as stated above, specifically states that the court should be satisfied on the evidence that the case of the petitioner is proved. Hence the court can neither direct a party to prove the allegations on mere affidavit of the party nor can it permit any affidavit to be read as evidence. Evidence has to be recorded in the manner contemplates under rule 4 or rule 5 of Order 18 of the Code of Civil Procedure as the case may be. In the instant case, the court has not even directed the party to prove any fact or facts by affidavit; but even so, has held that the case of the petitioner is proved by mere affidavit. This procedure followed by the court is highly illegal and arbitrary. We deprecate it. The mat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the name of the decision of the High Court. Before this court also no decision is pointed out by the contesting party in support of this order. In the circumstances this court expresses its displeasure for this one line order of dismissal of the interim applications contrary to the provisions of the Act. 15. The respondents argue that under section 20 an appeal remedy is available and, therefore, this court should not entertain this writ petition. Reliance is placed on the latest judgment of the Supreme Court in Punjab National Bank v. O.C. Krishnan [2001] 107 Comp. Cas. 20. The apex court in that reported case was considering with regard to an order passed directing the sale of property. That was a case of rejection of a valid app .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates