ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.

1. Heard Shri Rahul Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Amrish Sahai, learned counsel for respondent-Bank.

2. Present petition arises out of the order passed by Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad dated 08.10.2018 by which petitioner-appellant was directed to deposit Rs.1 crore (which is around 25% of the amount due at the time of filing of appeal), as pre-deposit for making the appeal entertainable before D.R.A.T.

3. Petitioner before this Court was one of partners of a firm known as M/s Sanjay Kumar Neeraj Kumar, which took bill purchase limit facility from respondent bank, Railway Road Branch, Hapur. According to petitioner, an application was moved by the firm for closing the said purchase limit on 10.01.1984 and also releasing the mortgage property with the bank. When no steps was taken by Bank a registered notice was given on 16.05.1984 to the Bank.

4. An Original Suit No. 223 of 1984 Heeralal and others versus Indian Bank and 3 others was filed with the relief of closing the account after settlement and for release of mortgage property. The said suit was contested by the bank and it filed its written statement stating that defendant firm had to pay an outstanding amount of Rs.20,866.84/-.

5. The said suit was decreed by judgment and order dated 22.12.2014, it was directed that 16.05.1984, the date of notice be treated as the date from which the amount of F.D.R. was to be adjusted in Current Account Nos.6 and 7 and the facility for extending the benefit to the firm be stopped and the mortgage deed be returned within two months.

6. Aggrieved by said order, a Civil Appeal No.14 of 2005 was filed by Bank against the partners as well as the firm M/s Sanjay Kumar Neeraj Kumar before the Additional District Judge, Court No.3, Ghaziabad.

7. The said appeal was dismissed by order dated 30.09.2009, against which the bank preferred a second appeal before this Court, which was also dismissed.

8. While Original Suit No.223 of 1984 was pending, the Bank filed Original Suit No.737 of 1986 before the Court of Civil Judge, Ghaziabad against the firm Sanjay Kumar Neeraj Kumar its partners and another firm M/s Bihar Traders.

9. In the aforesaid suit, the bank claimed that after raid by Sales Tax Department was conducted in the year 1982, the partners of the firm started business in the name of M/s Kansal brothers, Harish Chandra and Company, M/s Bihar traders. All the partners were the same.

10. In the said suit the bank claimed Rs.10,66,417.49/-. The said suit was contested by petitioner and other partners of the firm and written statement was filed. During the pendency of said suit, Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 came into force and the said suit was transferred to the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Jabalpur.

11. Thereafter, the said suit was transferred to D.R.T., Allahabad and finally to D.R.T., Lucknow, where it was registered as T.A. No.819 of 2002. It appears that petitioner or the other partners did not appear before the D.R.T., Lucknow, whereby an ex parte judgment was passed on 31.08.2009 holding the petitioner along with other partners of the firm liable for the payment of Rs.10,66,417.49/- along with interest at the rate of 18% with quarterly interest.

12. An application M.A. No.4 of 2010 was moved by petitioner along with other partners of the firm for recalling ex parte order dated 31.08.2009 on the ground that they did not have knowledge of matter pending before the D.R.T., Lucknow and when they received the order dated 31.08.2009 on 24.11.2009 came to know about the said ex parte order and, thereafter, they moved the recall application.

13. Debts Recovery Tribunal after considering the recall application by reasoned and speaking order rejected the same by order dated 04.09.2013 on the ground that petitioner and other partners had knowledge of the matter pending before D.R.T., Lucknow. Aggrieved by the said order, petitioner filed a Misc. Appeal u