1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17.2.2000 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1248 of 2000 dismissing the writ application filed by the appellant against the order dated 19.1.2000 passed by the Presiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), constituted under the Recovery of Debts Due to the Bank and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) rejecting the application of the appellant for setting aside the ex parte order dated 2.2.1999 decreeing the claim of respondent-Bank passed by it in Case No. 32 of 1998 as well as for a direction to issue a certificate under Section 19(7) of the Act for execution of the aforesaid order against the appellants.

2. In the writ application, the appellants have also prayed that Money Suit No. 21 of 1994 and Misc. Case No. 1 of 1996, which were pending before the Subordinate Judge prior to the transfer before the Tribunal, be sent back to the Court of the Subordinate Judge-III, Deoghar, for disposal of Misc. Case No. 1 of 1996 filed for setting side the ex parte decree passed in Money Suit No. 21 of 1994.

3. The facts lie in a narrow compass. The Respondent-State Bank of India (for short the Bank) through its Branch Office, Madhupur, District Deoghar, sanctioned a cash credit facility to the appellant-Company in the year 1988. The Company defaulted in payment of the amount. The Bank instituted Money Suit No. 21 of 1994 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge-1, Deoghar, for recovery of about Rs. 45 lacs. In spite of service of summons, the appellant-company did not appear in the suit and Court proceeded to dispose of the suit ex parte and, accordingly, passed an ex parte judgment and decree on 18.12.1995 against the appellants and, thereafter, the appellants (defendants in the suit) filed an application under Order IX, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the ex parte decree, which was registered as Misc. Case No. 1 of 1996.

4. The Central Government in terms of the provisions contained in Sec. 3 of the Act established the Tribunal at Patna on 24.1.1997 having jurisdiction over the States of Bihar & Orissa. On 10.3.1997, the Registrar of this Court issued a general direction to the Civil Courts directing them to transfer the relevant cases to the Tribunal in view of the provisions contained in Sec. 31 of the Act. Thereafter, the miscellaneous case, which was pending before the Sub-Judge was transferred to the Tribunal along with the records of Money Suit No. 21 of 1994. The Tribunal, thereafter, in exercise of power conferred under Section 31(2)(b) of the Act decided to proceed de novo with the claim of respondent-Bank and despite service of notice, the appellants did not appear and the Tribunal passed an ex parte order and allowed the claim of respondent-Bank by order dated 2.2.1999. The appellants filed an application for setting aside the ex parte order passed by the Tribunal, which was rejected by the impugned order dated 19.1.2000. Thereafter, the writ application was filed, which has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge of this Court.

5. Earned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the transfer of miscellaneous case pending before the Subordinate Judge for setting aside the ex parte order was impermissible in law as the same is not covered by the words "other proceedings" mentioned in Sec. 31 of the Act, which contains a provision with regard to the transfer of the pending cases. In other words, he submitted that the miscellaneous case filed either for restoration of the suit or setting aside the ex parte decree has to be filed before the Court, which has dismissed the suit or decreed the suit and, thus, the said proceeding after coming into force of the Act shall not stand transferred to the Tribunal in terms of the provisions contained in Sec. 31 of the Act. In support of the aforesaid submission, he relied upon a judgment of