Madras High Court
Jeyarathinam @ Siriyapushpam vs The Presiding Officer on 12 November, 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 12.11.2021
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
W.P(MD)NO.10315 OF 2017
and
W.M.P(MD)No.7892 of 2017
Jeyarathinam @ Siriyapushpam :Petitioner
.vs.
1.The Presiding Officer,
Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai.
2.The Presiding Officer,
Debts Recovery Tribunal,
Madurai.
3.The Authorised Officer,
Canara Bank,
Sankarankovil,
Tirunelveli District.
4.The Branch Manager,
Canara Bank,
Sankarankovil,
Tirunelveli District.
5.M/s.Roja Biscuits,
represented by its Parners S.Kannan,
S/160, Main Road,
Sankarankovil-1,
Tirunelveli District.
6.M/s.Roja Blue Metals,
represented by its Partners P.Antony Rajamani,
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
116, Ramasamayapuram,
Sankarankovil,
Tirunelveli District.
7.S.Kannan
8.P.Antony Rajamani : Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus
calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by
the first respondent dated 09.05.2017 in I.A.No.274 of 2015 in
AIR(SA)No.251 of 2015 and to quash the same and consequently
direct the first respondent to take the appeal in AIR(SA)No.251 of
2015 on file and decide the same on merits and in accordance with
law, within the time frame fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner :Mr.G.Mohankumar
For Respondents :Mr.C.Karthik
3 and 4
ORDER
*********
(Order of the Court was made by PUSHPA SATHYNARAYANA,J)
The borrower whose property was brought to sale in the
Debts Recovery Proceedings, has preferred the above Writ Petition
challenging the direction to pre-deposit a sum of Rs.10.10 Lakhs
with the Registrar of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal at
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and
perused the materials placed before this Court.
3.When the property in dispute was brought to sale, the same
was sold to one Murugan on 30.03.2015 for Rs.40,30,000/-(Rupees
fourty lakhs and thirty thousand only). The said sale was challenged
by the Petitioner in S.A.SR.No.3505 of 2015. The applicant was
permitted to deposit Rs.40,30,000/-(Rupees fourty lakhs and
thirty thousand only) which was the sale amount, which was
complied with by the Petitioner. Though the said amount has been
deposited, she was asked to deposit a sum of Rs.10.10
Lakhs(Rupees ten lakhs and ten thousand only) as a pre-condition
for entertaining the appeal by the Debts Recovery Appellate
Tribunal. The said condition of pre-deposit is now under challenge
in the present Writ Petition.
4.The question as to whether the pre-deposit is necessary or
not, is no more res-integra, in view of the Division Bench Judgment
Judgement in the case of Sree Jeya Soundharam Textile Mills
Private Limited , represented by its Managing Director,
Perungudi Village, Sivagangai .vs. The Canara Bank,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
represented by its Manager, P.N.Road Branch, Tirupur and
others reported in 2019(3) CTC 497, dated 11.04.2019. It
would be appropriate to advert to the relevant portion in Paragraph
22(vii) and(viii), which is extracted hereunder:
22.For the reasons stated above, we decide
the issue with regard to making of pre-deposit for
preferring an Appeal before the Debts Recovery
Appellate Tribunal as follows:
(i) to (vi)...........
(vii)The Appellant who has filed an Appeal
before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal
as against the Interlocutory Order passed by
the Debts Recovery Tribunal, is not liable to
make the pre-deposit if the liability is not
determined by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in
the Interlocutory Order.
(viii)In any other category other than the
categories mentioned above, the Debts
Recovery Appelate Tribunal shall decide the
waiver Application as per the principles laid
down in this judgment.
5.In view of the above, there is no necessity for the Writ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Petitioner to make pre-deposit of Rs.10.10 Lakhs(Rupees ten lakhs
and ten thounsand only) with the Debts Recovery Appellate
Tribunal, as the Challenge is only to an order made in an
interlocutory application. Therefore, the Debts Recovery Appellate
Tribunal is directed to hear the appeal filed by the Petitioner
without insisting on the pre-deposit and dispose of the same, after
affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, on
merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands allowed
and the impugned order is set aside. No costs. Consequently,
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[P.S.N.,J.] [P.V.,J.]
12.11.2021
Index :Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
vsn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Note :
In view of the present lock
down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of
the order may be utilized
for official purposes, but,
ensuring that the copy of
the order that is presented
is the correct copy, shall
be the responsibility of the
advocate / litigant
concerned.
To
1.The Presiding Officer,
Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai.
2.The Presiding Officer,
Debts Recovery Tribunal,
Madurai.
3.The Authorised Officer,
Canara Bank,
Sankarankovil,
Tirunelveli District.
4.The Branch Manager,
Canara Bank,
Sankarankovil,
Tirunelveli District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.
AND
P.VELMURUGAN,J.
vsn
0RDER MADE IN
W.P(MD)NO.10315 OF 2017
and
W.M.P(MD)No.7892 of 2017
12.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
