9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 1313X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssing its willingness to make payment of the balance agreed amount in terms of the compromise decree dated 15.12.2011, if the Respondent extends the time till March, 2015 and waives off the future interest. The Appellant is liable to pay the balance amount in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Presumably for this reason, no reply to the petition was filed by the Appellant despite ample opportunity being granted for the aforesaid purpose. The averments made in the petition are thus unrebutted and unchallenged. There are no infirmity in the impugned order. The order admitting the petition and issuing citation, therefore, calls for no interference - appeal dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned Company Judge on 14.03.2014 resulting in the passing of the impugned order. The averments made in the petition are thus uncontroverted. 3. We further note that there is no dispute between the parties that an original application being O.A. No.302/2011, before the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short 'the Act') for recovery of Rs. 13,52,63,763.66 together with costs, pendente lite and future interest etc. culminated in a settlement between the parties. 4. It is also not in dispute that as per the said settlement the Appellant was to pay Rs. 13,69,92,609/- alongwith interest in three instalments and the final instalment was to be paid on or befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted that our client is still ready to make payment of the balance agreed amount in terms of compromise dated 15.11.2011, if the applicant bank extends the time till March, 2015 and waives off the future interest." 8. It clearly emerges from the above that the Appellant is liable to pay the balance amount in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Presumably for this reason, no reply to the petition was filed by the Appellant despite ample opportunity being granted for the aforesaid purpose. The averments made in the petition are thus unrebutted and unchallenged. 9. In view of the aforesaid, we see no infirmity in the impugned order. The order admitting the petition and issuing citat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
