RDDBFI ACT: Non-compliance of DRT's order by one of party for discovery and production of documents in an adjudication pending before it is a matter to be decided on merit by DRT and DRAT; writ jurisdiction cannot be enforced
■■■
[2014] 50 taxmann.com 338 (Delhi)
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
G.D. Goenka (P.) Ltd.
v.
Standard Chartered Bank
SANJIV KHANNA AND V. KAMESWAR RAO, JJ.
W.P. (C) NO. 5341 OF 2014†
CAV. NO. 703 OF 2014
CM NOS. 10627-10628 OF 2014
AUGUST 22, 2014
Section 22 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, read with Order XI, rule 14 and rule 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Procedure and Powers of Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal - Pending adjudication of disputes before Debt Recovery Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal, respondent-bank was ordered to furnish certain documents - However respondent-bank produced one document and contended that it could not produce other documents as no record of document/information was maintained by them - Consequently petitioner filed application for passing order against respondent bank for non-compliance of order of discovery and production of documents which was rejected by DRT - Whether claim of respondent bank had merit or not and any adverse inference could be drawn or not was a matter to be examined by DRT and appellate authority and not an issue which could be decided in a writ petition - Held, yes [Para 13]
■■■
[2014] 50 taxmann.com 338 (Delhi)
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
G.D. Goenka (P.) Ltd.
v.
Standard Chartered Bank
SANJIV KHANNA AND V. KAMESWAR RAO, JJ.
W.P. (C) NO. 5341 OF 2014†
CAV. NO. 703 OF 2014
CM NOS. 10627-10628 OF 2014
AUGUST 22, 2014
Section 22 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, read with Order XI, rule 14 and rule 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Procedure and Powers of Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal - Pending adjudication of disputes before Debt Recovery Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal, respondent-bank was ordered to furnish certain documents - However respondent-bank produced one document and contended that it could not produce other documents as no record of document/information was maintained by them - Consequently petitioner filed application for passing order against respondent bank for non-compliance of order of discovery and production of documents which was rejected by DRT - Whether claim of respondent bank had merit or not and any adverse inference could be drawn or not was a matter to be examined by DRT and appellate authority and not an issue which could be decided in a writ petition - Held, yes [Para 13]
No comments:
Post a Comment