M.Subramanian v. Authorised Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23.04.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ and WMP No.15067 of 2025 M.Subramanian : Petitioner versus 1.Authorised Officer, CitiBank N.A.

No.91, Prestige South End, Opposite Surana College, Jayanagar, Bangalore 560 004 2.K.R.Vinod Kumar 3.M.K.Ramalingam 4.R.Gowri : Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to order dated 20.03.2025 passed by the Hon'ble D.R.A.T.Chennai, in IA No.489 of 2024 in A.IR(SA) No.821/2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the Hon'ble DRAT, Chennai to hear and decide the appeal on merits without insisting on the pre-deposit

condition imposed under the impugned order.

For Petitioner :

Mr.C.M.Mohanasundaram

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) Counsel states that the time given was too short to make the predeposit of Rs.9,88,658/-. Counsel says that the time expired on 17.04.2025. In view of the non-compliance, on 21.04.2025, the appeal came to be rejected. Counsel states that by 12 noon on 25.04.2025, petitioner would pay Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) as against Rs.9,88,658/- and if that is paid, the appeal be restored to file and heard on merits.

2. Respondents are not present before us. Nevertheless, since we find the suggestion to be reasonable and that extra amount of approximately Rs.12,000/- is agreed to be paid, with the delay of about one week; and since there were holidays in between 07.04.205 and 23.04.2025, we pass the following order:

a) If petitioner makes a deposit of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh only) by 12 noon on 25.04.2025, it shall be considered as

compliance of the order dated 20.03.2025 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal and the appeal shall stand restored.

b) Thereafter, the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal shall consider the appeal on merits. c) We express no opinion on the merits.

d) If the amount is not paid, this petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed.

3. Writ petition disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, the interim application also stands disposed of. (K.R.SHRIRAM, CJ.) (MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.) 23.04.2025 Index : Yes/No : Yes/No tar Note to Registry:

Issue order copy today

To 1.The Authorised Officer, CitiBank N.A.

No.91, Prestige South End, Opposite Surana College, Jayanagar, Bangalore 560 004 2.The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai.

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ , J.

(tar) 23.04.2025