JUDGMENT

L. MOHAPATRA, J.

This writ application is directed against the order dated 30-4-2011 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Cuttack in S. A. No. 37 of 2011 as well as the order dated 30-4-2012 passed by the Tribunal in O. A. No. 224 of 2010.

2. Case of petitioners is that they had taken loan from different Banks and all these loans were taken over by the opposite party-Bank and an amount of Rs. 1,46,17,562.00 was the only debit at one time but the account was treated as C. C. Account. The petitioners had already paid Rs.2,05,81,750.25 by 9-9-2011. In spite of the same, the opposite party Bank had made a demand of Rs. 39,87,933.25 in the notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act and the petitioners had paid a sum of Rs. 30.75 lakhs against the payment made inclusive in Rs. 2,05,81,750.25. However, the Bank without taking the note of the same took step under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act showing a demand of Rs. 9,12,933.25. According to the petitioners, the aforesaid amount of Rs. 9,12,933.25 was to be adjusted against Rs. 13,11,734.75 already paid and the balance amount of Rs. 3,98,801.11 should have been returned by the Bank to the petitioners. However, when the Bank filed Original Application No. 224 of 2010 for recovery of its dues before Debts Recovery Tribunal, petitioners filed written statement taking all these grounds. Had the original Application been adjudicated with reference to the records of the Bank, it could have been found that all the dues of the Bank had been paid and the petitioners were entitled to get return of Rs. 3,98,801.00. Without proceeding in the Original Application, the Bank took step under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, sold the mortgaged property in public auction, realized the so-called dues and ultimately approached the Tribunal praying for withdrawal of the Original Application on the ground that the entire dues of the Bank have been recovered through auction sale. Challenging the action taken by the Bank under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, the petitioners had filed S. A. No. 37 of 2011. The said SARFAESI Appeal was dismissed on 30-4-2011 on the ground that the grounds taken by the petitioners in the said appeal did not come within the scope of Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act and no illegality having been found in the procedure adopted by the opposite party-Bank, the Tribunal cannot adjudicate the dispute raised before it by the petitioners.

The opposite party-Bank appeared in the SARFAESI Appeal and filed counter affidavit stating therein that the account of the petitioners was declared N. P. A. on 30-11-2008 and notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued on 4-12-2008 demanding a sum of Rs. 39,87,933.25 as on 3-12-2008. The petitioners did not file any objection nor paid the demanded amount and, accordingly, notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, was published on 11-8-2009. After publication of the said notice, the petitioners requested the Bank not to proceed under the SARFAESI Act as they were willing to pay the dues of the Bank and, accordingly, time was granted to them. Petitioners having failed to pay the amount, the Bank intimated them that it would proceed under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. In compliance of the said letter, petitioners requested the Bank on 21-9-2010 for settlement of account at Rs. 20.00 lakhs under O. T. S. Scheme and grant three months time, but the demand made by the Bank was not disputed. The petitioners also filed W. P. (C) No. 16394 of 2010 with a prayer to direct the Bank to consider their O. T. S. proposal and not to proceed under the SARFAESI Act. By order dated 24-9-2010, this Court directed the petitioners to deposit a sum of Rs. 9.00 lakhs within one month, but due to non-compliance of the said order, the writ application was dismissed on 9-11-2010 and the interim order of stay was vacated. After dismissal of the writ application, the Bank proceeded under the SARFAESI Act and took over possession of t