191090110902018_ec263d3e25cbb168a418a8734c29f88d.pdf

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA 
          In-Charge Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad      
                            
Appeal No. 312 of 2018
(Arising out of O.A. No.125 of 2018 of DRT-2, Kolkata)
THE HON’BLE SHRI R S KULHARI
CHAIRPERSON
Sri Ram Parbesh Singh
Son of late Lakhan Singh
A1/14, S.S.B. Sarani
Sector 2(A), Bidhan Nagar
Durgapur-713212
              
   
  …  Appellant      
    
-versus-
1. Indian Overseas Bank
Branch Office at:
Gadhulu Marriage Hall
Section 2C, Iman Kalyan Sarani
Bidhannagar-Durgapur Branch
P.S.New Township District-Burdwan
2. Smt. Anima Singh
A1/14, S.S.B. Sarani
Sector 2(A), Bidhan Nagar
Durgapur-713212
3. Sri Girish Kumar
A-16, S.S.B. Sarani
Sector 2(A), Bidhan Nagar
Durgapur-713212
          …  Respondents
                           
Mr.R.S. Tiwari 
along with Mr. Pratik Goral
Advocates for the Appellant 
Ms. Aparajitha Ghosh, Advocate
along with Ms.B. Sarkar 
Asst. Manager-Law
For respondent bank

2
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL  : JUDGEMENT : Dt.12.12.2019
1. The appellant filed Appeal being Tender No.162/2018 before this 
Tribunal challenging the interim order passed by the Tribunal below
whereby some directions were given for one time settlement, 
pending I.A. No.620/2018.
2. This Tribunal vide order dated 09.01.2019 disposed of the Appeal
observing that I.A. is still pending so the Appeal is premature and 
not maintainable and further directed the Tribunal below to decide 
the I.A. No.620/2018 before finally adjudicating the matter.
3. The appellant challenged the order of this Tribunal before the
Hon’ble High Court by filing C.O. No.217 of 2019. However, in the 
meantime, the Tribunal below has passed some other orders on
16.01.2019 and 17.01.2019. Those orders were also challenged 
before the Hon’ble High Court. The Hon’ble High Court had 
disposed of all the C.Os vide order dated 05.02.2019 permitting 
the petitioners of the Revisional Applications to file their 
interlocutory applications in connection with the main proceedings 
before the Tribunal within a week and the Tribunal was directed to 
accept such applications and to fix the dates for hearing all those 
applications and to proceed with the hearing of the main matter 
after disposal of such applications.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Hon’ble High 
Court has set aside the order dated 09.01.2019 of this Tribunal 
therefore, the Appeal decided on 09.01.2019 be heard afresh and 
the proceedings pending before the Tribunal below be stayed.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent bank 
submits that the application filed by the appellant is misconceived. 
The appellant has restricted his challenge to the orders passed by 
DRT-2, Kolkata on 16.01.2019 and 17.01.2019 as observed by the 
Hon’ble High Court in its order dated 21.01.2019. Thus, the order 
dated 09.01.2019 passed by this Tribunal was neither argued 
before  the  Hon’ble  High  Court  nor  the  Hon’ble  High Court  has 

3
6. remanded the matter back to this Tribunal, rather disposed of the 
C.O.No.217 of 2019 along with other C.Os filed by the appellant 
and the petitioners before the Hon’ble High Court were directed to 
file interlocutory applications before DRT and the DRT to decide the 
same prior to final hearing of the main matter. Thus, the Appeal 
cannot be revived. The appellant is attempting to delay the matter.
On one hand, he is seeking stay against interlocutory applications 
pending before the Tribunal below and on the other hand, he is 
contending that the interlocutory applications are not being 
entertained. This Tribunal has finally decided the Appeal therefore, 
it cannot be heard afresh. 
7. I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and perused 
the record.        
8. Admittedly, this Tribunal has finally decided the Appeal vide order 
dated 09.01.2019 which was challenged in C.O.No.217 of 2019 
before the Hon’ble High Court. The Hon’ble High Court while 
hearing the matter o

…