w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Sidh Oil Mills Private Limited and others v/s Central Bank of India


Company & Directors' Information:- N K OIL MILLS PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U15201GJ1994PTC022669

Company & Directors' Information:- B P OIL MILLS LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15142UP1965PLC003232

Company & Directors' Information:- K P L OIL MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15142KL1983PTC003685

Company & Directors' Information:- SIDH OIL MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED [Dissolved] CIN = U74899DL1991PTC043686

Company & Directors' Information:- N K B OIL MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U15142KL1999PTC013095

Company & Directors' Information:- THE INDIA COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999TN1919PTC000911

Company & Directors' Information:- K K K OIL MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U15142KL2000PTC013621

Company & Directors' Information:- S N OIL MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U15142HR1986PTC025702

Company & Directors' Information:- G. B. OIL MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U15326HR1985PTC019817

Company & Directors' Information:- R. OIL MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U15141DL1992PTC047883

Company & Directors' Information:- J K OIL MILLS COMPANY LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U15143UP1955PLC002570

Company & Directors' Information:- N N OIL MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U15147MH1999PTC117989

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65990MH1941PTC003461

Company & Directors' Information:- J & T OIL MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U15141KL2006PTC019754

Company & Directors' Information:- A AND R OIL MILLS PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U15315CH1994PTC014265

    Appeal No. 111 of 2000

    Decided On, 08 February 2010

    At, Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal At Delhi

    By, J. M. MALIK

    H. C. Dhall, Yogesh Pachouri



Judgment Text


The Judgment was delivered by : Hon'ble Justice J. M. Malik

The learned Presiding Officer, DRT vide his order dated 25.6.1999 issued a recovery certificate in the sum of Rs. 1,01,60,554.59 along with pendente lite and future interest @ 24.25% p.a. with quarterly rests from the date of filing of O.A. till its realization in favour of the applicant Bank. Aggrieved by that order the present appeal was filed at Bombay, having jurisdiction at that point of time, in September, 1999.

2. I have heard the Counsel for the parties. The Counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that the learned DRT passed the said order as if he was dealing with an application under Order 37 of the CPC. Although, the appellant/borrower/defendant filed the written statement, yet, none of the parties including the Bank was given an opportunity to lead evidence. The Bank was not given an opportunity to file their evidence nor did they exhibit their documents. Likewise, no opportunity was given to the appellant to lead evidence in rebuttal.

3. Such hearings or dates are conspicuously missing from the order sheets. The learned DRT held that no arguable points were ever raised but the written statement reveals that the case was contested tooth and nail. The learned Counsel for the appellant further submitted that the appellant has already deposited more amount than what has been claimed by the Bank and defences were never considered.

4. On the other hand, Counsel for the respondent Bank submitted that this was the procedure which used to be adopted by the learned DRT. This procedure is not in accordance with the law. This is well known legal maxim, "no man should be condemned unheard". Again whatever disagreement there may be as to the scope of the phrase "due process of law", there can be no doubt due to it embraces the fundamental conception of a fair trial, with opportunity to be heard.

5. Consequently, I accept the appeal, set aside the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer, DRT and remand the case back to the DRT with the clear instructions to give opportunities to both the parties to lead evidence and decide the case properly. The learned Counsel for the Bank undertakes that he will file affidavit and produce evidence before the learned DRT on 26.2.2010 for which the Court may grant one more opportunity and close the case of the respondent Bank. Likewise, two opportunities be also given to the appellant for leading evidence and the case must be disposed of within three months from today and this is further made clear that this is an old case perhaps the oldest appeal pending in this Court, Consequently, the learned DRT would expedite the case and if possible after close of the evidence by both the parties would fix the case on day-to-day basis.

6. Parties to appear before the learned Presiding Officer, DRT concerned on 26.2.2010.

7. Order announced in the open Court in presence of the Counsel for the parties.

Copies of this order be furnished to the parties as per law. Another copy be sent to the learned DRT concerned.