9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (1) TMI 550X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t as per the particulars of claim in Exhibit "N". The said suit was transferred to Debt Recovery Tribunal under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short, "Act of 1993") in the year 1999. After the transfer, the suit was registered as original Application No. 2697/1999. Bereft of unnecessary details, for our present purposes, it may be noted that on 3-1-2002 the Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application against the defendants with half costs. The Debt Recovery Tribunal directed the defendants to jointly and severally pay to the applicant-Bank an amount of Rs. 18,47,828 with interest at the rate of 21.5 per cent per annum with quarterly rest from 1-1-2002 till full realisation. The Debt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Appellate Tribunal vide judgment dated 21-5-2002. The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal, set aside the order dated 26-4-2002 passed by Debt Recovery Tribunal and permitted the Bank to amend the Original Application within one week. The cost of Rs. 20,000 was imposed by the Appellate Tribunal on the Bank as a condition precedent for hearing of the review application filed by the defendants (petitioners herein). It is the order passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal which is impugned before us. 3. Ms. Rajni Iyer, the learned counsel for the petitioners, urged that in view of decree already having been passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, the amendment application moved by the Bank could not have been allowed. It was conte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ill judgment and thereafter further interest at the same rate since the advances were granted to the 1st defendants for commercial purposes. In the body of the plaint (Original Application) various documents executed by the defendants by way of security in favour of the Bank have been referred which according to the plaintiff Bank suggest that the defendants agreed to pay interest at the rate of 9.5 per cent per annum over the RBI subject to minimum of 21.5 per cent per annum which quarterly rest. The Tribunal passed the judgment directing the defendants to jointly and severally pay the Bank an amount of Rs. 18,47,828 with interest at the rate of 21.5 per cent per annum with quarterly rest from 1-1-2002 till full realisation. We are not exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave been aptly stated by Hidayatulla, J. (as he then was) in Lungya Balya Dhangar v. Bansilal Pusaram Mahesari AIR 1950 Nag. 95. Hidayatulla, J. relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench Fulchand v. Uderaj [Misc Civil Case No. 23 of 1947, dated 31-12-1948], wherein it was held thus: " It is clear that all clerical errors can be corrected at any time, even after judgment, and that even errors which do not bring out the true intention of the Court can in appropriate cases be corrected at a late stage. No authority for this proposition is needed, but we cite Rajbachan Singh v. Shatranjai, 17 Luck, 739 : AIR (20) 1942 Ondh 226. But this power of correction, which is given by sections 152 and 153, Civil P.C., is really exercis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s already noted by us, in the plaint or for that matter the Original Application and the documents referred therein, it cannot be said that the plaintiff Bank did not contemplate the claim of interest with quarterly rest on the due amount. Whether such claim of interest was justified or not is a different question. In this view of the matter, it cannot be said that the Appellate Tribunal committed any error of jurisdiction or gross error of law in permitting the Bank to amend the Original Application after disposal of Original Application by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. We again clarify that whatever has been said above by us shall not be read as a reflection of our opinion on the correctness of Tribunal s order in awarding interest at quart ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... original application was disposed of, it was not proper for the Bank to make amendment application and that when the quarterly rest has not been mentioned in the Original Application nor in the demand notice, the lacuna now sought to be filled in by way of amendment application could not have been granted. We do not find any infraction of principles of natural justice in disposal of the appeal by the Appellate Tribunal. 7. Since we have not found any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Appellate Tribunal on merits, we do not deem it necessary to deal with the objection raised by Mr. Samdani that upon acceptance of the cost of Rs. 20,000 it is not open to the petitioners to challenge the impugned order allowing amendment in Ori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
