1. This writ petition for and on behalf of debtors of the State Bank of India (respondent No. 2), is directed against the order dated 19-1-2000 (Annexure-3), passed by the Presiding Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Patna, in Misc. Appeal No. 11/99, whereby he has rejected the application of the petitioners for setting aside the ex parte order dated 2-2-99 (Annexure-1), passed by the Tribunal in case No. P.T. 32 of 1998 (arising out of Money Suit No. 21 of 1994), decreeing the suit and for directing issuance of certificate under Sec. 19(7) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), for execution against the petitioners. It is further prayed that the records of Money Suit No. 21 of 94 as well as Misc. Case No. 1 of 96 (the debtors application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C., which was pending before the Sub-Judge on the eye of transfer of the entire proceedings before the Tribunal) , be sent back to the subordinate Judge-III, Deoghar, for disposal of Misc. Case No. 1 of 96. This Misc. Case No. 1 of 96 was filed by the petitioners herein (the defendants in the suit), before Subordinate Judge-III, Deoghar, under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C., for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree passed by the Sub-Judge.

2. The respondent Bank had sanctioned cash credit facility up to Rs. 17,28,000.00 to the petitioner Company in the year 1988. The company fell in arrears and, therefore, the Bank instituted Money Suit No. 21 of 94, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge-I, Deoghar, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 34,36,298.70 P inclusive of interest calculated up to December, 1992, and a further sum of Rs. 10,33,000.00 towards interest from January 1993 to September, 1994. In spite of repeated opportunities given to the defendants (the petitioners herein), they refused to appear in the suit which was taken up ex parte and decreed by judgment dated 18-12-95. The defendants then promptly filed an application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.P.C. for setting aside the ex parte judgment and decree which was registered as Misc. Case No. 1 of 96.

3. While Misc. case was pending before the Subordinate Judge, Deoghar, the Central Government, in exercise of the powers informed by Sec. 3 of the Act issued notification dt. 24-1-97, whereby a Debt Recovery Tribunal was established in Patna having jurisdiction over the States of Bihar and Orissa, as a result of which the Tribunal was constituted and established in Patna w.e.f. 24-1-97. Let it be recorded for the sake of completion of record that the Registrar of this Court had issued letter dated 10-3-97 to all the District and Sessions Judges of Bihar directing them to transfer the relevant case records to the Tribunal. Consequently, the aforesaid Misc. Case No. 1 of 96, which was pending before the Sub-Judge on 24-1-97, was transferred to the Tribunal along with the records of Money Suit No. 21 of 94. It appears that in exercise of its powers under Sec. 31 (2)(b) of the Act, the Tribunal took up Money Suit No. 1 of 96 De Novo, and decreed the same ex parte by the judgment dated 2-2-99 (Annexure-1). The petitioners herein thereafter filed an application under Sec. 22(2)(g) of the Act before the Tribunal for setting aside the ex parte order dated 2-2-99 (Annexure-1) which has been rejected by the impugned order dated 19-1-2000 (Annexure-3). The petitioners have also preferred an appeal under Sec. 20 of the Act before the Appellate Tribunal which is pending. It appears that the Recovery Officer of the Tribunal (respondent No. 3) has passed order dt. 4-1-2000 (Annexure-4), for issuance of proclamation of sale of properties, and a public notice has been published in the local dailies of 1-2-2000, inviting tenders for purchase by public auction of the assets of the petitioner company.

4. While assailing the validity of the impugned order, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that transfer of Misc. Case No. 1 of 96, from the Court of