The main legal point established in the judgment is that once the Debt Recovery Tribunal is established, the jurisdiction of civil courts to entertain and decide applications from banks and financial institutions for recovery of debts due to such banks and financial institutions vests solely in the Tribunal.

1. We have heard counsel for the parties and with their consent we are-disposing of this appeal at the admission stage itself.

2. It is not disputed before us that a suit was filed by the State Bank of India against respondent no.3 praying for a decree for a sum of Rs. 10,82,000/- and odd which was advanced to respondent no.3 by way of loan. The said suit was tried by Subordinate Judge II, Kishanganj being Title Mortgage Suit No. 43 of 1982 and by judgment and decree dated 18.3.1997 the said suit was dismissed. The appellant Bank preferred a writ petition before this court being CWJC No. 4888 of 1997 challenging the said decree on the ground that the court was left with no jurisdiction to pass the judgment and decree on 18.3.1997 in view of the provisions of the Recovery of Debts Due To Banks & Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). A learned Judge dismissed the writ petition holding that the appellant Bank could seek its remedy by filing an appeal challenging the judgment and decree, and therefore no relief could be granted in writ jurisdiction. The said judgment and order dismissing the writ petition has been impugned in this appeal.

3. A few dates are relevant. The suit was filed in the year, 1982 and it continued till January, 1993. Mr. Mazumdar, counsel for respondent no.3 submits that according to his instruction the arguments in the suit were heard in the month of January, 1993, but he has no authentic record to support this fact. We will assume that arguments in the suit were heard and concluded in January, 1993 and all that remained to be done was to deliver the judgment. The judgment was delivered on 18.3.1997.

4. The facts not in dispute are that by notification dated 13.12.1996,(Annexure 2 to the writ petition), Shri Ram Prit Pathak, Dist. and Sessions Judge, Giridih was appointed as the Presiding Officer of the tribunal under the Act by the Central Government. By notification dated 24.1.1997 the Central Government established the Debt Recovery Tribunal at Patna having jurisdiction over the State of Bihar and Orissa, in exercise of powers conferred by Section 3 of the Act. It would, thus, appear that before the judgment was delivered on 18.3.1997 the said tribunal had been duly established, and the Presiding Officer also appointed by the Central Government. Thus the tribunal had come into existence before the judgment in the suit was delivered. The letter written by the Registrar of this court to all the Dist. & Sessions Judges of Bihar, directing them to transfer the relevant case records to the tribunal is not of much significance, though even the said letter was issued on 10.3.1997, a little before the judgment was delivered in the suit on 18.3.1997.

5. Section 17 of the Act providas that the tribunal constituted under the Act shall exercise, on and from the appointed day, the jurisdiction powers and authority to entertain and decide applications from the banks and financial institutions for recovery of. debts due to such banks and financial institutions. Section 18 of the Act bars the jurisdiction of civil courts by providing that on and from the appointed day, no court or authority shall have, or be entitled to exercise, any jurisdiction, powers or authority (except the Supreme Court, and a High Court exercising jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution) in relation to the matters specified in Section 17.

6. Section 31 of the Act is relevant which provides as follows:

"31. Transfer of pending cases. (1) Every suit or other proceeding pending before a court immediately before the date of establishment of a Tribunal under this Act, being a suit or proceeding the cause of action whereon it is is based is such that it would have been, if it had arisen aftertion of such Tribunal, shall stand transferred on that date to such Tribunal : Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any appeal pending as aforesaid before any court.

(2) Where any suit