( 1 ) RULE. Heard forthwith.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the orders passed by the Presiding officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune dated 16-12-2003 and the order dated 22-3-2006 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal in appeal No. 22 of 2004. A few essential facts may be set out. The respondent No. 1 bank has filed original Application No. 97 of 2003 against the petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 as the guarantors for recovery of an amount of Rs. 2,91,63,589. 52 ps as on 3-6-2003. During the pendency of the O. A. , the respondent No. 1 preferred an application under Rule 2 sub-rule (5) of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) rules, 1993 which hereinafter shall be referred to as the 'rules'. The application has to be read with section 19 (20) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and financial Institutions Act, 1993, hereinafter to be referred to as the said Act. The respondent No. 1 by way of relief sought an order to direct the petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to pay to respondent No. 1 an amount of rs. 1,64,79,715. 70 ps. , being the amount of debt admitted by the petitioners within one month from the date of the order. There is one