IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 9440 of 2006(W)
1. M/S. CRYSTAL DRUGS (PRIVATE)LTD.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. CANARA BANK, MANJERI BRANCH,
... Respondent
2. LEELAMMA MATHEW, DIRECTOR,
3. PHILOMINA MENDEZ, DIRECTOR,
4. JACOB K. JOY, DIRECTOR,
5. VARGHESE K. JOY, DIRECTOR,
6. MARIYAMMA JOY, W/O. LATE K.V. JOY,
7. T.K. JOSEPH KUTTY, DIRECTOR,
8. JOSE PAUL, DIRECTOR, M/S. CRYSTAL DRUGS,
9. A.T. JOHNY AVARAN, DIRECTOR,
10. VINOD KRISHNAN, DIRECTOR,
11. LEELAMMA SUNNY, DIRECTOR,
12. MARIAMMA THIMOTHY,
13. MATHEW JOSEPH, DIRECTOR,
14. LALY JOSE PANAKKEL,
15. M.M. MATHEW, PAIKA, POOVARANY P.O.,
16. HENRY MENDEZ, T.C.NO.27/957,
17. K.M. SUNNY, S/O. MATHEW,
18. DEEPA RAVISANKAR, KAVITHA,
19. GRACY JOY, D/O.LATE K.V.JOY,
20. ANNIE VARGHESE, D/O. LATE K.V. JOY,
21. LAILA JOY, D/O. LATE K.V. JOY,
22. VARGHESE K. JOY, S/O. LATE K.V. JOY,
23. SHEEMA, D/O. K.T. THIMOTHY,
24. R. RADHAKRISHNAN, PADMA BHAVAN,
25. AJAY RADHAKRISHNAN, PADMA BHAVAN,
26. CHAITANYA RADHAKRISHNAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.SURENDRA MOHAN
For Respondent :SRI.V.M.KURIAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :26/10/2007
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J
-------------------
W.P.(C). 9440/2006
--------------------
Dated this the 26th day of October, 2007
JUDGMENT
The first respondent filed a suit against the writ
petitioner for recovery of money. The petitioner filed a
written statement raising counter claim with an
application to sue as an indigent person in relation to the
counter claim. Pending that suit, the Recovery of Debts
Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993,
hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, came into force. As a
consequence, the suit was transferred to the Debt
Recovery Tribunal, which proceeded with the matter.
With the passage of time, Section 19 of the Act stood
amended with effect from 17.1.2000 authorizing the
Tribunal to entertain counter claims. Thus, the Tribunal
got the power to adjudicate on counter claims. But, that
would not invite any liability to pay the court-fee in
relation to the counter claim before the Tribunal. This
issue is covered by the decision of this Court in Dataware
Design Labs (P) Ltd. v. State Bank of India (2005
(2) KLT 96). Parties had also settled the matter out of
Court and entire loans have been discharged.
W.P.(C).9440/2006
2
Under the above circumstances, this writ petition is
allowed quashing the directions in Ext.P4 to remit an
amount of Rs.65,000/-. It is hence directed that the
amount of Rs.65,000/- paid by the petitioner in
obedience to the order in T.A.1105/1997 shall be
refunded to the petitioner, by the Tribunal, within a
period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment.
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN
Judge
mrcs