Page No.# 1/4 vs The Union Of India And 6 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 2926 Gua

                                                                  Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010177202021




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : WP(C)/5693/2021

         M/S SONAPUR GRAMIN BHANDAR AND ANR
         A PROPRIETARY FIRM, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR MD. AMIRUL ISLAM
         LASKAR, S/O. LT. ABDUL RUF LASKAR, R/O. SONAPUR BALIGATE, P.O.
         AND P.S. SONAPUR, DIST. KAMRUP (M), PIN-782402, ASSAM.

         2: MD. AMIRUL ISLAM LASKAR
          S/O. LT. ABDUL RUF LASKAR
          PROPRIETOR OF M/S SONAPUR GRAMIN BHANDAR
          R/O. SONAPUR BALIGATE
          P.O. AND P.S. SONAPUR
          DIST. KAMRUP (M)
          PIN-782402
         ASSAM

         VERSUS

         THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS
         REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, DEPTT. OF
         AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE, KRISHI BHAVAN, DR.
         RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD, NEW DELHI.

         2:NATIONAL BANK FOR AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
         (NABARD) ASSAM

          RO
          G.S. ROAD
          OPP. ASSAM SECRETARIAT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-06
          REP. BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER.

         3:THE REGIONAL DIRECTORATE OF MARKETING AND INSPECTION (DMI)

          ASSAM REP. REGIONAL DIRECTOR
                                                             Page No.# 2/4

             BORA SERVICE STATION BLDG.
             G.S. ROAD
             ULUBARI
             GUWAHATI-781007.

            4:STATE BANK OF INDIA

             REP. BY THE BRANCH MANAGER OF JORABAT BRANCH
             P.O. BYRNIHAT
             DIST. RI-BHOI
             MEGHALAYA
             PIN-793101.

            5:THE RELATIONSHIP MANAGER

             MEDIUM ENTERPRISES
             SALES BUB
             SBI
             KHANAPARA
             P.O. KHANAPARA
             DIST. RI-BHOI
             MEGHALAYA
             PIN-781022.

            6:AUTHORIZED OFFICER

             STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH (SARB)
             REP. BY ASSTT. GENERAL MANAGER
             2ND FLOOR
             SIGNATURE SQUARE M.R.D. ROAD
             BAMUNIMAIDAM
             GUWAHATI-781021.

            7:THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

             KAMRUP METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
             GUWAHATI

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. N N KARMAKAR

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
                                                                       Page No.# 3/4

                                BEFORE
                     HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

                                     ORDER

17.11.2021

Heard mr. N.N. Karmakar, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R.M. Sarmah, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.4, 5 & 6.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners primarily challenging the judgment dated 26.09.2018 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati on an application being O.A. No.560/2017 (State Bank of India -Vs- M/s Sonapur Gramin Bhandar & Anr.) filed by the State Bank of India under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to the Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.

The undisputed facts are that the petitioners had taken a loan of Rs.1,88,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Eighty Eight Lakhs) from the Bank, which was not repaid and subsequently the application was filed by the Bank for recovery of the aforesaid amount. Although notices were served upon the petitioners, they did not appear and the matter went ex-parte in the said proceedings. The application of the Bank was allowed vide judgment dated 26.09.2018.

This order was initially challenged by the petitioners before this Court in a civil revision for the reasons best known to them. All the same, on the said revision, an order was passed giving liberty to the petitioners to move an application for recalling the said judgment dated 26.09.2018.

The petitioners thereafter moved an application before the Tribunal which Page No.# 4/4

was dismissed for non-prosecution on 10.01.2019. Thereafter, another application was moved by the petitioners for recalling the order dated 10.01.2019 and this Court has been informed by the learned counsel appearing for the Bank that in the said application, a date has been fixed for 09.12.2021.

In this background, there is absolutely no reason for hearing the petitioners when a statutory remedy in any case is provided to the petitioners for filing an appeal against the judgment dated 26.09.2018 under Section 20 of the Recovery of Debts Due to the Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 before the Appellate Tribunal. Meanwhile as of now, the recalling application is already pending before the Tribunal.

In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioners must appear before the Tribunal on 09.12.2021 and in case their application for recalling is allowed, the petitioners shall be at liberty to raise all the arguments before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

                      JUDGE             CHIEF JUSTICE



Comparing Assistant