Anuja Prabhudessai JUDGMENT
1. A Division Bench of this Court by an order dated 25th August 2015 expressed an opinion that the following questions should be decided by a larger Bench of this Court. The said three questions read thus:
"(i) Whether a debenture trustee suing on behalf of the debenture-holder for recovery of sums payable to the debenture-holder can file a suit on the original side of this Court since suit is for recovery of the debt?
(ii) Whether such proceedings can be initiated by the debenture-trustee before the Debt Recovery Tribunal?
(iii) Whether the judgment in the case of Krishna Filaments (supra) would be applicable to the facts of the present case and whether there is any difference of opinion between two judgments which are delivered by two Division Benches of this Court?"
2. The Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice by order dated 6th October 2015 directed that the present Full Bench be constituted to decide the aforesaid questions.
3. Though Larger Bench cannot decide the factual controversy, for the sake of convenience, a brief reference to the facts of the case will be necessary.
4. The appellant is a banking company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. It is a scheduled bank within the meaning of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934. The appellant is the original plaintiff. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereafter referred by their status before the learned Single Judge. The first defendant is a company carrying on business of manufacturing, producing, distributing, importing, exporting, buying, selling and dealing with all types of goods based on rubber or plastics whether for domestic or industrial use and ancillary products. The second to tenth defendants have been impleaded in the suit as they may have an interest in the properties of the first defendant that are charged to the plaintiff.
5. By an agreement 7th October 1992 executed by the first defendant in favour of the plaintiff, it was agreed that the plaintiff shall act as a trustee for the debentures (12.5% secured redeemable non convertible debentures aggregating Rs. 997 lacs) issued by the first defendant. A suit was filed on 7th February 2002 by the plaintiff in its capacity as a debenture trustee for the recovery of the amounts payable by the first defendant under 12.5% secured, redeemable and non-convertible debentures aggregating Rs. 997 lacs together with interest, costs and charges as well as other monies payable at the contractual rates in accordance with the terms of the issue of debentures. A Notice of Motion was taken out by the first defendant raising an issue of jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the suit and also praying for rejection of the plaint by exercising the power under Rule 11 of Order VII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 or in the alternative, for the return of the plaint for presentation to the appropriate Debt Recovery Tribunal(for short "DRT"). Apart from the suit filed by the present plaintiff, there were other similar suits placed before the learned Single Judge. By Judgment and Order dated 6th January 2015, the learned Single Judge upheld the contentions of the first defendant and held that this Court will not have jurisdiction to entertain and try the suits. Accordingly, the suits before him were ordered to be returned for presentation to the appropriate Debt Recovery Tribunal. The plaintiff has taken an exception to the said Judgment and Order dated 6th January 2015 by preferring the present Appeal.
6. Before the learned Single Judge, the plaintiff relied upon a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Krishna Filaments Limited v. Industrial Development Bank of Ind........