Disposed

Avocation Air and 3 Ors. v. the State Bank of India and Anr.

Gauhati HC2 Nov 2018WP(C)/7601/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a writ petition filed against an ex parte ex parte recovery certificate. The Court directed the petitioners to file a review petition before the Debt Recovery Tribunal within 30 days and stayed further action based on the certificate.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to file review petition within 30 days; further action on recovery certificate stayed.

Avocation Air and 3 Ors. Vs the State Bank of India… — Writ and Judicial Review | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010243362018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 7601/2018

¶5

1:AVOCATION AIR AND 3 ORS.

¶6

REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI DIBYAJYOTI BHATTACHARYYA, S/O- LT KHAGENDRA NATH BHATTACHARYYA, BHABANI BUILDING, S.C.ROAD, TEZPUR, DIST- SONITPUR,, ASSAM, PIN- 784001

¶7

2: SRI DIBYAJYOTI BHATTACHARYYA S/O- KHAGENDRA NATH BHATTACHARYYA BHABANI BUILDING S.C.ROAD TEZPUR DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001

¶8

3: SRI SWAPNEEL BHATTACHARYYA S/O- KHAGENDRA NATH BHATTACHARYYA R/O- JYOTIBAN CHANDMARI P.O. TEZPUR DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784007

¶9

4: SRI NAYANJYOTI BHATTACHARYYA S/O- KHAGENDRA NATH BHATTACHARYYA R/O- JYOTIBAN CHANDMARI P.O. TEZPUR DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 78400 VERSUS

¶10

Page No.# 2/3

¶11

1:THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR.

¶12

TEZPUR BAZAAR EVENING BRANCH, DIST- SONITPUR, ASSAM, PIN784001 (REP. BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER)

¶13

2:THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL (DRT) GHY-7 REP. BY ITS PRESIDING OFFICE

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K TALUKDAR

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent :

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Date : 02-11-2018

¶19

Heard Mr. S.K. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶20

Having regard to the order which is proposed to be passed, issuance of notice is considered not necessary and the case is taken up for disposal at the motion stage itself.

¶21

Petitioners are aggrieved by judgment and order dated 27.08.2018 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati in OA No.570/2017 issuing recovery certificate in favour of respondent No.1 for an amount of Rs.34,71,288.39 against all the defendants (petitioners herein) jointly and severally with interest pendente lite and future interest till realization of the certificate amount.

¶22

A perusal of the said judgment and order dated 27.08.2018 would go to show that it was passed ex parte for failure of the defendants (petitioners herein) to file written statement and thereafter to adduce evidence.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners had sought for only one additional opportunity before the Tribunal for submission of written statement which was turned down. It is seen from the copy of the order-sheet dated 10.07.2018 which has been annexed to the writ petition that learned counsel representing the defendants had sought for time on 20.02.2018 for filing written statement which was granted but subsequently it was noticed that no such written statement was filed whereafter in the order dated 10.07.2018 it was recorded that right of the defendants to file written statement and evidence stood closed.

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

Though there was lapse on the part of the petitioners in not filing written statement and adducing evidence, however taking an overall view of the matter, Court is of the opinion that it would subserve the cause of justice if one more opportunity is granted to the petitioners to file written statement and to adduce evidence.

¶26

Rule 5A of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993 provides for filing of petition for review.

¶27

In that view of the matter, petitioners may file petition for review before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati and if such petition is filed within a period of 30 days from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the Tribunal in accordance with law having regard to the observations made above.

¶28

During this period of 30 days, further action based on the recovery certificate shall not be taken.

¶29

With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Avocation Air and 3 Ors. v. the State Bank of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avocation Air and 3 Ors. v. the State Bank of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nagarmal Kumawat Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Soburuddin Ahmed and 11 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Kamakhya Karmokar and 16 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

M/S Manash Padmabari Jinjiram Fishery Cooperative Society Ltd., Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Abdus Sattar Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Abul Kalam Azad Vs the State of Assam and 18 Ors.