(Per : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN)

Letters Patent Appeal No. 1126 of 2008 arises out of interim order passed by the learned Single Judge on 16.3.2008. When the appeal came up for hearing, with the consent of parties we called for the main writ petition and heard the appeal as well as the writ petition finally.

2. Appeal has been preferred by Standard Chartered Bank, a banking company within the meaning of Definition 2(e) of the Recovery of Debts Due to the Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, first respondent in the application. Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 herein preferred Special Civil Application challenging an order passed by the Presiding Officer of DRT, Ahmedabad, on 9.5.2008, allowing an application preferred by Standard Chartered Bank, for substituting itself in place of ICICI Bank in the recovery certificate No. 1941 issued in O.A No. 62/03.

3. ICICI Bank Limited had filed O.A No. 62/03 in the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ahmedabad for recovery of an amount of Rs. 4,38,67,473/- from respondents herein. During the pendency of the application, parties entered into certain terms and conditions to settle the dispute. It was agreed that ICICI Bank would receive an amount of Rs. 2 crores to be paid in four installments, the first being Rs. 30 lakhs to be paid by 15.11.2003, and the remaining amount of Rs. 1,70,00,000/- to be paid in three monthly equal installments, starting from January 31, 2004 and ending on March 31, 2004. It was agreed that in case of failure of the respondents herein to pay the amount, the settlement would stand revoked and the obligation and liability of the respondents would be to pay the full amount of Rs. 4,38,67,473/-. Parties agreed that the consent terms would be placed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal for passing a consent decree thereon, on the terms entered into by the parties. Consent terms were incorporated and made part of the order dated 8.12.2003 passed by Debt Recovery Tribunal, however, respondents failed to honour their commitments. Out of Rs. 2 crores agreed to be paid, a sum of only Rs. 25 lakhs was paid and the balance amount was not paid. Under such circumstances, ICICI Bank issued a notice to the respondents and also filed an application before the Recovery Officer of Debt Recovery Tribunal, praying for issuing demand notice No. 1941 in O.A No. 62/03, against respondents, and also praying for execution of recovery certificate dated 9.12.2003 for the entire amount of Rs. 4,38,67,473/-.

4. The Recovery Officer of Debt Recovery Tribunal issued a notice of demand dated 18.5.2008 to the respondents claiming a total sum of Rs. 5,92,05,619/-, inclusive of interest. However, the amount was not paid by the respondents. ICICI Bank later, through a deed of assignment dated 18.6.2006 with the Standard Chartered Bank had assigned the rights and liabilities of the first respondent, Applitech Solution Limited, along with various other companies. Pursuant to the deed of assignment, Standard Chartered Bank filed a Civil Misc. Application, being CMA No. 30/06 in O.A No. 62/03 before Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ahmedabad, seeking substitution of Standard Chartered Bank, in place of ICICI Bank Limited, at nine places in the recovery certificate dated 9.12.2003 issued in O.A No. 62/03. It was pointed out before Debt Recovery Tribunal that ICICI Bank had assigned the debt and securities to Standard Chartered Bank by deed of assignment dated 18.2.2006 and they should be allowed to proceed with the recovery proceedings against respondents.

5. Application was opposed by the respondents stating that once recovery certificate was issued, the same could not be rectified or corrected. It was also pointed out that the deed of assignment did not specifically refer to the consent decree, and the recovery certificate obtained by ICICI Bank Ltd. Further, it was also pointed out that in Entry 13 of Schedule annexed to the deed of assignment, it was mentioned that no immovable properties were