Madras High Court
C.Cycil vs Canara Bank on 6 October, 2023
C.R.P(MD)Nos.1980 and 1981 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 06.10.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI
C.R.P(MD)Nos.1980 and 1981 of 2023
C.Cycil ... Petitioner/Petitioner/Defendant
in both petitions
-vs-
1.Canara Bank,
Thisayanvilai Branch,
Tirunelveli District,
Through its Branch Manager ... 1st Respondent/1st Respondent/Applicant
in both petitions
2.S.Shanmugam ... 2nd Respondent/ 2nd Respondent/Auction Purchaser
in both petitions
3.The Recovery Officer,
Debts Recovery Tribunal,
Madurai. ... 3rd Respondent in both petitions
[R3 is suo-motu impleaded vide order dated 09.08.2023]
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)Nos.1980 and 1981 of 2023
PRAYER in C.R.P.(MD)No.1980 of 2023: Civil Revision Petition has been filed
under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the Return Endorsement
Order made in I.A.Sr.No.5485 of 2022 in R.C.No.49 of 2021 in O.A.No.1131 of
2015, dated 05.07.2023 and 17.07.2023 on the file of the Recovery Officer (DRT)
Madurai and direct the Recovery Officer (DRT) Madurai to take I.A.SR.No.5485
of 2022 in R.C.No.49 of 2021 in O.A.No.1131 of 2015 on file and number and
pass final orders within a time frame to be determined by this Court.
PRAYER in C.R.P.(MD)No.1981 of 2023: Civil Revision Petition has been filed
under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the Return Endorsement
Order made in I.A.SR.No.4050 of 2023 in I.A.SR.No.5485 of 2022 in R.C.No.49
of 2021 in O.A.No.1131 of 2015, dated 05.07.2023 and 17.07.2023 on the file of
the Recovery Officer (DRT) Madurai and direct the Recovery Officer (DRT)
Madurai to take I.A.SR.No.4050 of 2023 in I.A.SR.No.5485 of 2022 in R.C.No.
49 of 2021 in O.A.No.1131 of 2015 on file and number and pass final orders
within a time frame to be determined by this Court.
In both petitions:
For Appellant : Mr.P.Thirumahilmaran
For R1 & R2 : Dispensed with
For R3 : Mr.K.Govindarajan
Deputy Solicitor General of India
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)Nos.1980 and 1981 of 2023
COMMON ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.]
Mr.K.Govindarajan, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India takes notice
for the third respondent. Notice to the respondents 1 and 2 are dispensed with in
view of the order passed hereunder.
2(a). The petitioner herein, who is the borrower of the loan from the first
respondent bank has initially filed an appeal against the order of the Recovery
Officer in R.C.No.49 of 2021 and also remitted a sum of Rs.12,55,535/- and the
same was returned with an endorsement that only an appeal is maintainable under
Section 30-A of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. Subsequently,
he has represented the said petition, as, one under Rule 60 & 61 of the Second
Schedule of Income Tax Act, 1961, alleging that there is an error in proclamation
of the sale notice and there is a defect in the sole notice and the said application
was returned with an endorsement.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)Nos.1980 and 1981 of 2023
2(b). Initially, by a returned endorsement, the said appeal papers were
returned for pre-deposit contemplated under Section 30-A of the Recovery of
Debts and Bankruptcy Act and the same was also returned with an endorsement
as stated supra. Finally, the petitioner has decided to change the provision of law
under Rule 60 & and 61 of Second Schedule of Income Tax Act, 1961 for
recovery proceedings and the said application was returned on the ground that the
papers that has been presented as an appeal, has now been changed as I.A., and
the same is not maintainable and hence, the above revision.
3. The learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the third
respondent drew our attention to the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court dealing
with the rights of DRT, wherein, certain observations have been made in
connection with Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner also drew our attention to the
Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in R.S.Infra-Transmission
Limited Vs. Saurinindubhai Patel and Others reported in III (2022) BC 550
(SC) wherein, at paragraph 3.9, the submissions of the learned counsel therein has
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)Nos.1980 and 1981 of 2023
been summarized. Rule 60 of the Second Schedule of Income Tax Act r/w Rule
53 will attract pre-deposit amount. But Rule 61 stands on different footing. Since
the matter has to be adjudicated by the Recovery Officer, hence, we are not
expressing any view as to whether pre-deposit is to be made or not, it has to be
decided by the concerned Recovery Officer depending upon the facts and
circumstances of the case placed before them.
5. The only point that is we are called upon to answer is whether the
petitioner which was originally filed as an appeal after return for compliance of
certain defects and represented as I.A., is maintainable or not. We have no
hesitation to hold that the same is maintainable. Accordingly, we answer the point
in aforementioned in favour of the revision petitioner herein. We are not
expressing any opinion upon the merits and requirement of pre-deposit amount if
any for numbering the case and accordingly, we direct the third
respondent/Recovery Officer to take on the file in I.A.SR.No.4050 of 2023 in
I.A.SR.No.5485 of 2022 in R.C.No.49 of 2021 in O.A.No.1131 of 2015 and on
the point of maintainable only, we decide the issue. However, with regard to the
requirement of pre-deposit if any and the amount already deposited has to be
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)Nos.1980 and 1981 of 2023
adjacent or not, we have left it to the judicial discretion of the recovery officer as
per rules thereof.
6. The Civil Revision Petitions are allowed as indicated above. No costs.
7. The Registry is directed to return the original papers so as to enable the
petitioner to represent within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order. The Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madurai shall
decide about the return of excessive Court fee as contended by the learned
counsel for the petitioner.
[T.K.R., J.] [P.B.B., J.]
06.10.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
sji
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)Nos.1980 and 1981 of 2023
To
The Recovery Officer,
Debts Recovery Tribunal,
Madurai.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.R.P(MD)Nos.1980 and 1981 of 2023
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
and
P.B.BALAJI, J.
sji
C.R.P(MD)Nos.1980 and 1981 of 2023
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.12488 of 2023
06.10.2023
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
