DRT has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate on debts claimed by banks, including those arising from loans advanced by non-banking entities prior to amalgamation.

JUDGMENT :

ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.

1. The present petition takes exception to order dated 4^th April, 2024 passed by the learned District Judge-2, Aurangabad, on an Application Exhibit-230 in Commercial Suit No.12/2019, thereby ordering transfer of the said suit to Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad (hereinafter referred to as “DRT Aurangabad”).

2. A Company, named HDFC Limited had filed a suit, being Special Civil Suit No.46/2007 for recovery of amount of Rs.3,14,85,223/- against the petitioner and respondent nos.2 to 12. The suit is pertaining to recovery of amount advanced in two separate loan accounts. The outstanding amount in two loan accounts as per respondent no.1/plaintiff was Rs.2,32,28,013/- and Rs.82,62,210/- as on the date of filing of suit. After commencement of Commercial Courts Act, 2015, the said suit was transferred to Commercial Court and was registered as Commercial Suit No.12/2019. Pending the said suit, HDFC Limited came to be amalgamated with HDFC Bank Limited, vide order dated 17^th March, 2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai (NCLT, Mumbai) in Company Scheme Petition No.240/2022, granting approval to the scheme of amalgamation. HDFC Bank Limited is a Banking Company under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. In view of amalgamation of HDFC Limited with HDFC Bank Limited, all the assets and liabilities of HDFC Limited stood vested with HDFC Bank Limited. Under the scheme, HDFC Bank Limited is also entitled to continue to prosecute all litigations initiated by HDFC Limited prior to its amalgamation with HDFC Bank Limited. Accordingly, name of HDFC Bank Limited is impleaded as plaintiff in the suit and the suit is being prosecuted by HDFC Bank Limited.

3. In this backdrop, HDFC Bank Limited filed an Application, vide Exhibit-230 in Commercial Suit No.12/2019 praying for transfer of the said suit to DRT, Aurangabad in view of Sections 17 and 18 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as “RDB Act”).

4. The petitioner, who is defendant no.11 in the said suit opposed the application by filing detailed reply on 20^th February, 2024. After hearing rival submissions, the learned Trial Court has allowed the Application filed vide Exhibit-230 vide order dated 4^th April, 2024 holding that the suit was required to be transferred to DRT, Aurangabad in view of amalgamation of HDFC Limited with HDFC Bank Limited. Accordingly, the learned Trial Court ordered the matter to be placed before the learned Principal District Judge, Aurangabad for appropriate administrative action. The said order dated 4^th April, 2024 is challenged by defendant no.11/petitioner by filing the present petition.

5. Mr. Subodh Shah, learned Advocate for the petitioner contends that DRT will not have jurisdiction to try the suit, which is ordered to be transferred to it by the impugned order. The learned Advocate has referred to Section 19 of the RDB Act, to contend that an Application under Section 19 of the said Act can be filed by a Bank or a Financial Institution to recover debt from any person. He contends that a proceeding for recovery of any amount other than debt cannot lie before Tribunal. He refers to definition of term “Debt” as defined under Section 2 (g) of the Act to contend that the term “Debt” means only such amount, which a bank claims to be due to it from any person during the course of any business activity undertaken by the Bank. The contention is that in the present case, the loan was advanced by HDFC Limited, which was not a bank, and therefore, DRT will not have the jurisdiction to entertain the controversy forming subject matter of the suit. Mr. Shah contends that the date on which the suit was filed by HDFC Limited, the Civil Court was having jurisdiction to try and deci