Vikash Jain, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition questions the validity of the order dated 08.09.2009 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna (hereinafter referred to as ‘the DRT’) under Section 31-A of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘RDB Act’) in relation to a decree of the Civil Court, the latter having been passed after commencement of the said RDB Act.

3. The short facts of the case are that a cash credit limit of Rs. 2,00,000/- was sanctioned by the respondent-Bank which was later enhanced to Rs. 3,60,000/- in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner along with guarantors executed the necessary documents such as Deed of Hypothecation, Deed of Guarantee, Demand Promissory Notes etc. in order to secure the due repayment of the cash credit. The petitioner’s business suffered considerable loss leading to default in repayment of the loan. The respondent-Bank filed Title Mortgage Suit No. 276 of 2003 for realization of dues of Rs. 5,89,439.62 which was allowed in terms of judgment dated 28.11.2005 together with interest pendente lite and future til