VIKASH JAIN, J.

1. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent bank.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the judgment dated 02.05.2014 passed by the Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal [for short “the DRT”], Patna in O.A. No. 70 of 2012 [Central Bank of India vs. Sri Ram Janam Prasad and others], whereby and whereunder in exercise of his jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 [hereinafter referred to as “the RDDBFI Act”] he has passed a judgment for recovery of Rs. 75,48,762/- with pendente lite and future interest against the petitioner and defendant no. 3 jointly and severally till realization, and has issued a certificate of recovery in terms of the provisions contained in Section 19(22) of the Act.

3. Mr. Umesh Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner makes a short submission to the effect that impleading the petitioner as a party defendant for the purpose of recovery of the subject dues was completely beyond the competence and authority of the DRT. It is submitted that the action of the Presiding Office