Dismissed

Deepak Kumar Agarwal v. Punjab National Bank

DRAT11 Aug 2025REGULAR APPEAL/83/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the DRT's dismissal of a memo of appeal seeking release of personal guarantee. It held the release of guarantee is a mixed question of law and fact, requiring final disposal of the original application.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed by DRAT, Kolkata; DRT directed to decide issue of release of personal guarantee at final disposal of OA expeditiously within twelve weeks.

Deepak Kumar Agarwal versus Punjab National Bank — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2025)

¶1

Reportable/Non-Reportable

¶2

Appeal No. 83 of 2018-DRAT-Kolkata

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

¶4

Appeal No. 83 of 2018 (Arising out of M.A. 305 of 2017 in O.A. 630 of 2014 in DRT, Cuttack)

¶5

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON

¶6

Deepak Kumar Agarwal, Son of Ram Niwas Agarwal, Resident of Plot No.1036, Mahanadi Vihar, P.O. - Nayabazar, P.S. Chauliaganj, Town/District - Cuttack;

¶7

Dinesh Agarwal, Son of Sri Bansidhar Agarwal, Resident of Plot No. 1037, Mahanadi Vihar, P.O. Nayabazar, P.S. Chauliaganj, Town/Dist. Cuttack.

¶8

… Appellants

¶9

-Versus-

¶10

Punjab National Bank, represented through its Branch Manager, Nayabazar Branch, At/P.O.Nayabazar, Town/District - Cuttack-753 004, Odisha;

¶11

M/s Mahabali Alloys Private Limited, Regd. Office at-Piligrim Road, College Square, Town/District – Cuttack - 753 003, Odisha;

¶12

Sri Koushik Mohanty, Son of Braja Bihari Mohanty, At Tapaswinee, Plot No. 252/3318, Gangadhar Meher Marg, Bhubaneswar-751 024, District - Khurda, Odisha;

¶13

Sri Abhinash Mohanty, Son of Abheda Nanda Mohanty, At Plot No.556, Lewis Road, BJB Nagar, Bhubaneswar – 751 014, District - Khurda, Odisha;

¶14

Sri Anshuman Samantaray. Son of Brajaraj Samantaray, At-Plot No. 4912 (P), In front of-EA-50, Badagada Brit Colony, Bhubaneswar – 751 018 District - Khurda, Odisha;

¶15

Sri Bidubhusan Nayak, Son of Bishnu Charan Nayak, At Duplex-15, Ratna Niwas, Brahmeswarpatna, Bhubaneswar – 751 018, District - Khurda, Odisha;

¶16

Ram Niwas Agarwal, Resident of Plot No. 1036, Mahanadi Vihar, P.O. Nayabazar, P.S. Chauliaganj, District – Cuttack – 753 004, Odisha. … Respondents

¶17

Counsel for Appellants … Mr. Dipanjan Datta Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury

¶18

Counsel for Respondent No. 1 /Bank … Mr. Omkar Ganguly JUDGMENT : 11^th August, 2025

¶19

¶20

Appeal No. 83 of 2018-DRAT-Kolkata

¶21

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL:

¶22

1. Instant appeal has arisen against the order dated 22.01.2018 passed by the Learned DRT, Cuttack in M.A. 305 of 2017 arising out of O.A. 630 of 2014 (United Bank of India -vs- M/s Mahabali Alloys Private Limited) whereby Learned DRT dismissed M.A. 305 of 2017 for release of personal guarantee of Defendants No. 2 and 3.

¶23

2. At the very outset, Learned Counsel for Appellant would submit that the issue of release of the Guarantee of the Defendants No. 2 and 3 in the O.A. proceedings who are the sons of Ram Niwas Agarwal and were the Directors of the Company is to be decided as a preliminary issue by the Learned DRT.

¶24

3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent Bank opposed and submits that this issue could not be decided as preliminary issue as it is not a question of law rather it is a mixed question of law and fact which can only be decided at the time of final disposal of the O.A.

¶25

4. O.A. 630 of 2014 was filed by the Bank against the Defendants under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. Appellants herein were Defendants in the O.A. who filed M.A. 305 of 2017 for a prayer to decide the question relating to release of personal guarantees as preliminary issue.

¶26

5. Order XIV C.P.C. provides about framing of issues wherein Order 14 Rule 1 Sub rule 4 provides that issues are of two kinds (a) issue of fact (b) issue of law. Issue of law

¶27

¶28

Appeal No. 83 of 2018-DRAT-Kolkata can be decided as a preliminary issue but if the question is of mixed question of law and fact, it cannot be decided as a preliminary issue, as has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Hareendran & Others -vs- Sukumaran & Others [(2018) 14 SCC 187] .

¶29

6. Issue regarding release of the personal guarantee is of mixed question of law and fact which could not be decided as a preliminary issue by the Learned DRT. Accordingly, I am of the considered view that this issue should be decided by the Learned DRT at the time of final disposal of the O.A. 7. I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed.

¶30

O R D E R

¶31

Appeal is dismissed. Learned DRT is directed to decide the issue regarding release of personal guarantee at the time of final disposal of the O.A. Needless to say that the O.A. is pending since 2014. Accordingly, Learned DRT, Cuttack is expected to decide the O.A. as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date copy of this order is placed before the Learned DRT.

¶32

File be consigned to Record room.

¶33

Copy of the Judgment/Final Order be uploaded in the Tribunal’s Website.

¶34

Order pronounced in open Court.

¶35

(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson

¶36

¶37

Appeal No. 83 of 2018-DRAT-Kolkata Dated: 11^th August, 2025 18/ac

Deepak Kumar Agarwal v. Punjab National Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Kumar Agarwal v. Punjab National Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Alimonsur Mistry versus Yes Bank

V Raghvendra versus Union Bank of India

K Kartik Sagar versus Union Bank of India

D. Srinivasulu Reddy versus Indian Bank

Ram Niwas Agarwal versus Punjab National Bank

Rama Plywood versus Punjab National Bank