Original Application No. 176 of 2002. Case: Indian Bank Vs Lark Chemicals Ltd.. Mumbai Debt Recovery Tribunals

Case NumberOriginal Application No. 176 of 2002
CounselFor Appellant: Sheetal Chaturvedi, Adv., i/b., M. Dhruv & Co. and For Respondents: Arun Mehta, Adv., i/b., Akshar Laws
JudgesK.J. Paratwar, Presiding Officer
IssueBanking Law
Citation3 (2006) BC 101
Judgement DateOctober 10, 2005
CourtMumbai Debt Recovery Tribunals


K.J. Paratwar, Presiding Officer

  1. The acceptor of below noted 3 bills (Hundis) issued in this Original Application for recovery of Rs. 26, 43, 289.47 being dues under Bills/Purchase Discounting Facility with interest @ 21% per annum with quarterly rest from the date of filing the Original Application till full realization.

    Hundi No. and Date Amount Due Date AVIK/H/254 12th January, 1999 5, 41, 620 26th February, 1999 AVIK/H/255 12th January, 1999 5, 41, 620 3rd March, 1999 AVIK/H/257 12th January, 1999 5, 41, 620 13th March, 1999

  2. The applicant's constituent Avik Pharmaceutical Ltd, had drawn said bills which were accepted for due payment on due dates by the defendant. The Bank discounted the bills and thus became holder in due course. The defendant did not pay the amounts on due dates and even thereafter despite repeated demands. The bills were therefore got notarized after which also the payments were not made. Therefore this Original Application is filed.

  3. The defendant in written statement (Exhibit 9) has admitted to have accepted the bills. The defendant however has come out with a case that the drawer of the bills had itself made the payment thereof in October-November 2000 to the Bank. The contention is that the Bank deliberately suppressed the factum of receipt of the principal amount to the Hundis from the drawer. The defendant has in this connection referred to the correspondence between the Bank and the drawer of the bill pertaining mainly to rehabilitation package as apart of which the drawer made payments with specific instructions to appropriate the same towards the bills in question and requested for waiver of interest. The Original Application is sought to be dismissed on aforesaid contentions.

  4. The defendant filed application at Exhibit 32 requesting for framing preliminary issue about the maintainability of the Original Application on the ground that the outstandings at best are of the interest from due date upto the date of the payment. The amount of such interest would by no stretch of imagination be Rs. 10 lacs. That being so the bank could not have filed the Original Application in this Tribunal for want of pecuniary jurisdiction. This application is ordered to be decided along with the Original Application. The Bank did not file any reply to the same.

  5. The evidence in this case comprises claim affidavit of Mr. A. Chinnadurai (Exhibit 11) officer of the Bank and the bills of exchange (Exhibits 13 to...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT