IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

W.P. NO.52798 OF 2018 (GM-DRT)

BETWEEN:

1.

M/S. BANGALORE MANAGEMENT ACADEMY PVT. LTD.

NO.17, ASHIRWAD TOWERS

MAHADEVAPURA RING ROAD

MARATHAHALLI, BANGALORE

REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER

SRI. Y. SREENIVASAN

S/O YELLAPPA

AGED 35 YEARS

RESIDING AT NO.246, GROUND FLOOR

7TH CROSS, ROSE GARDEN

NEELASANDRA, BANGALORE-560047.

2.

ROBINSON ROBERT DONISON

S/O DONISON

CHRISTIAN AGED 45 YEARS

MANAGING DIRECTOR

M/S. BANGALORE MANAGEMENT ACADEMY PVT. LTD.,

NO.17, ASHIRWAD TOWERS

MAHADEVAPURA RING ROAD

MARATHAHALLY, BANGALORE-560037

NOW IN LONDON DULY

REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY

SRI. Y. SREENIVASAN

S/O YELLAPPA

AGED 35YEARS

RESIDING AT NO.246, GROUND FLOOR

7TH CROSS, ROSE GARDEN

2

NEELASANDRA

BANGALORE-560047.

... PETITIONERS

(BY MR. KRISHNASWAMY, ADV.,)

AND:

THE IDBI BANK LTD.

NO.102, SHATHI COMFORTS TOWERS

K.H.ROAD, BANGALORE-560027

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER.

... RESPONDENT

(BY MR. T.P. MUTHANNA, ADV.,)

- - -

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227

OF

THE

CONSITUTION

OF

INDIA,

PRAYING

TO

QUASH

ANNEXURE-F DTD:31.1.2013 PASSED BY DRT, BANGALORE IN

O.A.NO.377/2012. ANNEXURE-H DTD9.10.2017 PASSED BY THE

DRT-II BANGALORE IN I.A.NO.1171/2017 [CONDONATION OF

DELAY] IN SR 7269/2017. QUASH ANNEXURE-A DTD:15.10.2018

PASSED IN M.A.NO.27/2018 BY THE DRT, CHENNAI AND RESTORE

O.A.NO.377/2012 ON THE FILE ON DRT, BANGALORE FOR FRESH

CONSIDERATION & ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,

ALOK ARADHE J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

3

ORDER

In this writ petition, the petitioner inter alia has

assailed the validity of the order dated 31.03.2015 passed by

the Debt Recovery Tribunal as well as order dated

09.10.2017 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal and the

order dated 15.10.2018 passed by the Debt Recovery

Appellate Tribunal, Chennai (hereinafter referred to as 'the

tribunal' for short). In order to appreciate the petitioner's

challenge to the impugned order, relevant facts need

mention, which are stated hereinafter.

2.

The petitioners are borrowers who have availed

of financial assistance from the respondent-Bank to the

extent of Rs.2,39,66,000/- in the year 2009. The petitioners

did not repay the loan amount. Thereafter, the Bank initiated

a proceeding for recovery of the amount under the Recovery

of Debts Due to Banks Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as

'the Act' for short). The petitioners were served with the

summons, however, no appearance was made before the

Debt Recovery Tribunal. The Debt Recovery Tribunal by an

order dated 18.06.2012 proceeded ex-parte against the

4

petitioners and thereafter, by an order dated 31.01.2013

allowed the original application preferred by the bank.

3. The respondent, thereafter, filed an application on

29.06.2017 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal to set aside

the ex-parte order passed on 31.01.2013. An application

under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was also filed for

condonation of delay of 1583 days in filing the application for

setting aside the ex-parte order. The aforesaid application

was rejected by an order dated 09.10.2017 passed by the

Debt Recovery Tribunal. The petitioners, thereupon, filed an

appeal before the Tribunal. The aforesaid appeal has been

dismissed by order dated 15.10.2018. In the aforesaid

factual background, this petition has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

the petitioners were not served in the proceeding before the

Debt Recovery Tribunal. It is also urged that since, the

property is situate at Chennai, therefore, Debt Recovery

Tribunal, Bangalore had no jurisdiction to entertain the claim.

It is also pointed out that the order dated 31.01.2013 is

cryptic and suffers from the vice of non application