Telangana High Court
M/S. Srinivasa Talkies And 4 Others vs The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal ... on 12 September, 2024
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO
WRIT PETITION No.12678 of 2009
ORDER:
(per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe) Ms. B. Shailaja, learned counsel appears for Ms. K. Udaya Sri, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Mr. A. Krishnam Raju, learned Standing Counsel for State Bank of Hyderabad appears for respondent No.3.
2. In this Writ Petition, the petitioners have assailed the validity of the order dated 25.05.2005 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad, in O.A.No.225 of 2003, as well as the order dated 31.01.2007 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, dismissing R.A.No.41 of 2006 preferred by the petitioners.
3. Facts giving rise to filing of this Writ Petition briefly stated are that the petitioners obtained a loan of Rs.3,50,000/- from respondent No.3 - State Bank of India, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bank'), for construction of a cinema talkies. The petitioners secured the amount of loan by 2 CJ & JSR, J W.P.No.12678 of 2009 creating an equitable mortgage in respect of the schedule properties. The petitioners could not repay the amount of loan. Thereupon, the Bank was constrained to file a suit, namely, O.S.No.25 of 1990 before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sattupalli, for recovery of a sum of Rs.5,93,264/-.
4. In the aforesaid civil suit, a preliminary decree was passed on 31.03.2001. Against the aforesaid preliminary decree, defendant Nos.1, 2, 8 and 9 filed an appeal, namely, A.S.No.2481 of 2001 before the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The aforesaid appeal was allowed vide judgment and decree dated 12.12.2001 by which a Bench of this Court modified the decree passed by the trial Court and directed the defendants to pay a sum of Rs.5,93,264/- along with interest @15% per annum with quarterly rests from the date of suit till the date of decree and thereafter, simple interest @ 15% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization. The Bank filed an Execution Petition, namely, E.P.No.46 of 2002 before the Civil Court. The aforesaid proceeding, on constitution of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, was transferred to the Tribunal and was numbered as 3 CJ & JSR, J W.P.No.12678 of 2009 O.A.No.225 of 2003. The Debts Recovery Tribunal by an order dated 24.05.2005 allowed the aforesaid O.A. and issued the recovery certificate.
5. Being aggrieved, the petitioners filed an appeal, namely, R.A.No.41 of 2006, before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal. The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal by an order dated 31.01.2007 inter alia held that the petitioners are not entitled to claim the benefit of One Time Settlement (hereinafter referred to as 'OTS') Scheme issued by the Reserve Bank of India dated 29.01.2003 as OTS Scheme is applicable only to the cases where the decree has not been passed. The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal affirmed the order dated 24.05.2005 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal and dismissed the appeal. In the aforesaid factual background, this Writ Petition has been filed.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Debts Recovery Tribunal grossly erred in issuing a recovery certificate for a sum of Rs.12,20,623/-. It is further submitted that the Debts Recovery Tribunal as well as the Debts 4 CJ & JSR, J W.P.No.12678 of 2009 Recovery Appellate Tribunal grossly erred in awarding interest @15% per annum. It is argued that the Debts Recovery Tribunal erred in awarding an amount of Rs.66,507/- on account of Advocate Fee and other charges.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent Bank has supported the order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
8. We have considered the rival submissions made on both sides and have perused the record.
9. Admittedly, the Bank had filed O.S.No.25 of 1990 before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sattupalli, for recovery of a sum of Rs.5,93,264/-. It is not in dispute that in the aforesaid civil suit, a preliminary decree was passed on 31.03.2001. Against the aforesaid decree, defendant Nos.1, 2, 8 and 9 preferred an appeal, namely, A.S.No.2481 of 2001. The aforesaid appeal was allowed by judgment and decree dated 12.12.2001 and the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court was modified and the defendants were directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,93,264/- together with interest @15% per 5 CJ & JSR, J W.P.No.12678 of 2009 annum with quarterly rests from the date of the suit till the date of decree and thereafter, simple interest @15% per annum from the date of decree till realization. The aforesaid judgment and decree has attained finality and therefore, the contention urged on behalf of the petitioners that the interest could not have been awarded @ 15% does not deserve acceptance.
10. So far as the submission that the petitioners are entitled to OTS Scheme issued by the Reserve Bank of India dated 29.01.2003 is concerned, it is noteworthy that the guidelines relating to the aforesaid Scheme was considered by the Supreme Court in X-Calibre Knives (Petitioner) Ltd. v. State Bank of India 1 and it was held that the guidelines of the aforesaid Scheme apply only in cases where the decree has not been passed. In the instant case, the decree against the petitioners has already passed on 31.03.2001 and therefore, the aforesaid Scheme floated by the Reserve Bank of India on 29.01.2003 subsequently does not apply to the facts of the case. The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal has therefore rightly negatived the contention of the learned counsel for the 1 (2005) 10 SCC 265 6 CJ & JSR, J W.P.No.12678 of 2009 petitioners that the petitioners are entitled to benefit of the OTS Scheme issued by the Reserve Bank of India dated 29.01.2003.
11. For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find any ground to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Debts Recovery Tribunal as well as the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal.
12. In the result, the Writ Petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
___________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ ____________________ J. SREENIVAS RAO, J 12th SEPTEMBER, 2024.
kvni