JUDGMENT :

Sanjib Banerjee, J.

(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 03.04.2019 made in A.I.R.No.670 of 2018 on the file of Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai.)

1. It is unfortunate that this matter has remained pending in this court for such a long time and the respondent bank has been prevented from pursuing its remedies by virtue of an unreasoned order of this court of April 30, 2019.

2. The challenge here is to an order of pre-deposit passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, in connection with the petitioner’s appeal filed under Section 21 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. The relevant provision mandates a pre-deposit. However, the 50 per cent of pre-deposit that the provision speaks of may be reduced to not less than 25 per cent for reasons to be recorded in writing by the appellate tribunal.

3. In other words, upon adequate cause being shown by an appellant as to why it should not be required to make the full quantum of statutory pre-deposit, the DRAT has the authority to reduce the quantum of deposit as long as the reduced quantum is not below 25 per cent of the amount of debt adjudg