For reference of such judgments please click DRT Judgments Favourable / Useful to Borrowers

Our Client wins in Securitisation Appeal against 4 Banks in DRT – amount involved nearly Rs. 90 crores and a tooth & nail fight of 4 years

Important Victory of Our Client against Bank:- One of our important clients at Chandigarh who filed damage suit of Rs. 1825 crores against a public sector Bank on 13.01.05 registered an important victory on 03.03.07 when the Court waived the entire court fee despite all opposition by the defendant Bank. The alleged dues of the Bank are Rs. 30 crores. Since the damages are much more than the alleged claim of the bank, no recovery action can be executed till the said damage suit is finally decided. The usual delay in the litigation does not affect our client as the damages are increasing day by day due to interest charges at rate which is much higher than the increase in the alleged claim of the bank. The said damage suit was drafted by us and all necessary advice and guidance was provided on all dates of proceedings.

Counter-claim is the only defence for the borrowers against Notice under Securitisation Act and or Original Application under the DRT Act:- Under the present provisions of law, the only legal defence for the borrowers is Counter-claim giving quantum of loss and damages suffered due to wrong doings of the lenders. The pleadings must be prepared by a person having mastery of facts and mastery of law. The documents such as project report, application for financial assistance, loan sanction letters, correspondence, balance sheets, annual reports need to be referred to properly keeping in view the law of pleadings, law of torts, law of damages, principles of natural justice, equity and good conscience. If you are unable to get such pleadings prepared, our professional services may be utilized. With our drafting of pleadings, you get additional advantage of expert advice during course of litigation from beginning to end. Since our clients are from all parts of the country and due to our focussed attention, you get complete and exhaustive guidance. All our clients are having upper hand over the lenders. In many cases the lenders have come forward to waive total interest and settle at fraction of the principal amount. In one of the case the proposal of the lender is waive the total claim provided the borrower withdraws the damage claim, which the borrower has declined.

Counter-claim must be prepared much in advance of of the Notice under Securitisation Act or filing of the Original Application under the DRT Act:- The counter-claim or damage suit must be prepared much in advance of the recovery action initiated by the lender. The most appropriate stage is as soon as the lender declares the unit as NPA. The said counter-claim or damage suit must be ready before the lender issued Notice under Securitisation Act or files Original Application is filed by the lender in DRT. With such advance action only, the counter-claim or the damage suit will attain proper quality standards from legal considerations. As soon as the legal Notice from the lender under Securitisation or DRT Act is received the said counter-claim or damage suit is updated and filed before expiry of the Notice Period. Since prima facie there is no debt due, the lender can not take any action for the possession of the assets till the litigation pertaining to the said counter-claim or damage suit is decided by the court of law. Even if any attempt is made by the lender to take possession, the property can not be sold. Further steps in the DRT should be as outlined in the next para. 

Winning bank litigations in DRT:- The first step is perfect pleadings drafted by a person having mastery of facts and mastery of law. The borrower must setup his counter-claim in money value based on law of damages and law of torts. In almost all the cases, the counter-claim is much more than the claim of the lender. These are the condition precedents before commencement of litigation in DRT. The next important step is thorough preparation of the case by the borrower as well as his advocate much in advance of the commencement of the trial in DRT. The borrower and his advocate must prepare at least 7 days before the date. In case the counter-claim has been drafted by us, the outcome of the said preparation must be discussed with us on phone so that our guidance is also available prior to the date. The proceedings on the date must be properly recorded in the DRT. All the relevant facts must be obtained much before the arguments and through preparation must be made. No arguments be held at any stage till all the facts are discovered. Long dates should be resisted. With proper alertness and vigilance by the borrower who must work in unison with his advocate in advance will ensure winning bank litigations in DRTs. It must be understood that the battle is long drawn, time consuming and expensive. Even after winning in DRT, the borrowe and his advocate will have to work hard in facing the appeals in ADRT, High Courts and Supreme Court. If the pleadings are drafted by us, we provide all guidance from DRT to Supreme Court.  

DRT, drtsolutions, Debt Recovery Tribunal, DRT matters, DRT WS, DRT Legal Opinions, DRT Arguments, DRT Documents, Appellate DRT, Bank litigations, Securitisation, Counter-claims, NPAs Settlements, expertise in all these matters past more than 30 years being a Leading Law Firm.

Highlights:- All problems of Debt Recovery Tribunals i.e. DRT and Securitisation Act, BIFR are tackled by us. People from all over the country are phoning us, then visiting and getting their problems solved. Please visit Home Page and other Pages also. Our specialization in industrial finance, DRT, have equipped us with rich knowledge and experience to prepare replies, counter-claims in DRT and to handle proceedings.

Details and Content of DRT Cases handled by us and

Cases in pipe line

Note:- We have prepared several DRT cases including counterclaims which have been filed in various DRTs in the country including at Jabalpur, Mumbai, Delhi, Allahabad etc. Some of the cases prepared by us are as under:- 

You may click on the titles below to view the details:-

(1) Industrial unit facing DRT litigation of Rs. 69.23 crores files a counter-claim of Rs.1864.14 crores.

(2) Industrial unit facing DRT litigation of Rs.  4.57 crores, counter-claim prepared for Rs. 1370.16 crores.

(3) Industrial unit facing DRT litigation of Rs. 11.69 crores, counter-claim prepared for Rs. 1081.99 crores.

(4) General comments on all above cases.

(5) Prestigious Cases in pipe line.

(6) Conclusion.

Our Client files damage suit of Rs. 1825 Crores against a bank and a financial institution in Chandigarh:- Our Client, an eminent Supreme Court Advocate (practice more than 25 years in Supreme Court) has filed a damage suit of Rs. 1825 Crores in Chandigarh on 13.01.05 against a bank and a financial institution. The said damage suit was drafted by us and it runs in 118 pages having documents of 537 pages. In a video interview lasting more than 30 minutes on 23.01.05, the said Mr. Malik appreciated our legal concepts, our drafting and our knowledge and experience about application of law of torts to banking, industrial sickness, drt, counter-claim, securitisation act, BIFR and calculations of damages.

Many visitors of this site have desired to know the details and the content of the DRT, BIFR cases recently handled by us. The following are some of the prominent DRT, BIFR cases handled by us:-

(1) Industrial Unit facing DRT litigation of Rs. 69.23 crores, files a counter-claim of Rs. 1864.14 crores:-

(1) The unit was established in 1984-85. The unit is now having annual turnover of Rs. 100 crores and employs 2000 workers. Its annual export is worth Rs. 30 crores. The unit was profit making and dividend paying public limited company till 1994-95. The company went into major expansion in 1995 with the financial inputs from a public financial institution and a public sector bank. Unfortunately performance of the foreign plant supplier-cum-partner was most unsatisfactory. As a result the company lost about two years and suffered heavy losses. The said PSB started non-cooperating  and harassing with effect from April 1997. In the meantime the company had to make reference to the BIFR  in July 1997. The bank continued to create problems and non-cooperation despite several meetings and numerous correspondence but without providing any further financial assistance. The bank even ignored the orders of the BIFR. The BIFR adversely commented. The bank simply ignored the orders of the BIFR. The bank did not care about the contentions of the operating agency appointed by the BIFR and continued to change its stand from time to time. Finally just a day earlier to finalization of the rehabilitation package in BIFR, the bank withdrew suddenly. This action of the bank was again severely commented by the BIFR. The bank filed a recovery application for Rs. 69.23 crores before the DRT without any orders of the BIFR. The party approached us for the opinion. We studied all the documents, project reports, correspondence, balance sheets, accounts, legal proceedings in BIFR, AAIFR, High Court etc. and prepared a counter-claim of Rs. 1864.14 crores up to 31.03.02. The counter-claim runs in 123 pages. The counter-claim has been filed in DRT. The BIFR was also duly informed. The pleadings in the counter-claim are based on law of torts, law of damages and compensation, BIFR and AAIFR proceedings, RBI Guidelines, Supreme Court rulings, technical facts and figures based on annual reports, balance sheets and correspondence. The entire counter-claim was prepared without any discussions with the party and it was based solely on the documents. The party got the said counter-claim checked up from the leading advocates and legal authorities in the country including those experts in DRT and BIFR matters. During any adverse situation in DRT or due to misuse of the provisions under the Securitisation Ordinance, such counter-claim has saved the party and their assets from any adverse actions. If the order of DRT goes against the party and the party is required to file appeal under the DRT Act or under the provisions of the said Ordinance, there will be a solid foundation for appeal. The appeal route from ADRT, High Court and Supreme Court will offer enough opportunity for justice. In such context, building up of solid case at the level of civil court or DRT is highly essential.

(2) The bank has furnished the reply to the counter-claim. The bank has also filed two interim applications. The party referred the same to us. We prepared replies to the applications along with case laws and legal comments. Rejoinder to the reply is also being prepared. On one hand there is stay from BIFR, the bank is now finding difficult to fight the DRT battle. it has become jittery, It is creating hurdles for the party in getting finances for other projects. These wrong doings of the bank amount to defamation. The party has informed DRT and BIFR. In time to come the matter would be dealt with NCLT i.e. the court in place of BIFR.

[Back to Top]

(2) Industrial Unit facing DRT litigation of Rs. 4.57 crores, counter-claim prepared for Rs. 1370.16 crores:- During the period 1991-95, the unit generated profits. Side by side it started research and development. For its growing activities in production as well as in R & D activities, it needed further funds. The public sector bank which provided the working capital proposed consortium financing. There were several consortium meetings for nearly two years. In the mean time, the unit faced serious financial crunch. One of the bank officials became annoyed. The relations of the unit and bank became bitter. Bank officials in collusion started troubling by unnecessary correspondence. Finally in one of the consortium meetings, it was decided that the TCO (Technical Consultancy Organization) of the state should conduct viability studies. Just before the declaration of the results of the said viability studies, the bank issued legal notice and filed recovery application in DRT. Since it was already a BIFR case, the proceedings in DRT were stayed. At this stage, the party approached us for advice. We studied all the documents, correspondence, project reports, balance sheets, accounts, court and BIFR proceedings etc. We prepared a counter-claim under the law of torts, law of  damages and compensation, DRT Act and the constitution of India quoting various RBI Guidelines and appropriate Supreme Court rulings. Using the information contained in the project reports, balance sheets, accounts and the correspondence  we calculated damages under various heads such as direct loss, business opportunity loss, injury to the property, loss of insurance claim, loss of services due to death of two directors, nervous shock and loss of reputation, aggravated damages, exemplary damages etc. All the injury, loss and damages from various legal angles were highlighted within the framework of law of pleadings. The total damages as on 31.01.02 were found to be Rs.1370.16 crores. The counter-claim runs in 68 pages, it was delivered to the party with full satisfaction of their DRT and BIFR advocates. Depending on the proceedings of the BIFR and DRT, the said counter-claim will be filed at opportune moment. It will be a very good defence against the Securitisation Act, if the bank proceeds with the notice under the provisions of the said Act. The party has duly informed BIFR. The proceedings in BIFR would continue in NCLT, i.e. the court formed in place of BIFR.

[Back to Top]

(3) Industrial unit facing DRT litigation of Rs. 11.69 crores, counter-claim prepared for Rs. 1081.99 crores:-

(a) The unit was established in 1961. It was sick for nearly eighteen years. During this period, once it was acquired by another group which also could not cure its sickness. The present management purchased this unit in 1979 and revived it to modest profit within two years. The turnover and export respectively rose to Rs. 113.36 Crores and Rs. 8.77 Crores in 1997-98 The unit employs 900 people. In its appraisal note dated 28.10.95, the bank appreciated the company in all the parameters. In order to expand its business the company  went into expansion in the year 1995 and established another unit. On account  of slow down in the Indian economy resulting in low demand, depressed capital markets, liquidity crunch and power crisis, the company started having financial problems from the year 1995 which had adversely affected the profitability and working of the company. Workers also created problems by resorting to go slow and illegal strike. The bank also started putting spokes in flow of funds as well as indulging into unnecessary correspondence. The term lending public financial institution evolved a rehabilitation package. Instead of agreeing to such package, the bank filed an application in DRT for recovery of its dues. In the meantime, the company had to make a reference to the BIFR in May 2001. Subsequently the company restarted its production in July 2001. The BIFR was duly informed. The company approached us for advice. We studied all their documents, project reports, annual reports, balance sheets, correspondence and legal proceedings including those in BIFR. We prepared a damage suit of Rs. 1081.99 crores as on 31.10.01. The company is waiting for suitable opportunity to file either the damage suit in the civil court or counter-claim in DRT depending on lifting of the stay in DRT due to BIFR proceedings. The party even filed the damage suit in civil court and the case is now under transfer to DRT. The matter in BIFR would continue in NCLT, the court in lieu of BIFR. 

[Back to Top]

(4) General Comments on all the above cases:-

(a) As per the law, the counter-claim is the only defence for the borrowers and guarantors in DRT as well as against Securitisation Act. It is needless to mention that the bureaucracy in banks and financial institutions is completely and all pervasively bound by the central government acting through RBI. In practice the said bureaucracy commits numerous violations of the law resulting into injury, loss and damages. Detecting these  violations and preparing proper pleadings requires knowledge of industry, business, balance sheets, accounts, project reports and correspondence combined with the banking laws including those relating to DRT, BIFR, Securitisation Act and now NCLT. We have long experience of 15 years in all these areas. Hence in case of any difficulty, our clients ring us and they get instantaneous solution.

(b) There is difference between the personal loan and industrial loan. Proper legal presentation of the said violations in respect of industrial loan requires the knowledge of law of pleadings, DRT Act, laws relating to BIFR, Securitisation, NCLT etc., Interpretation of statutes and procedural law. This is not possible for the traditional lawyers.

(c) The measure and calculations of damages requires knowledge of law of damages and compensation. Full coverage of all factors can only be achieved by the application of law of torts.

(d) It is a stark reality that most of the competent advocates are terribly busy and heavily burdened with their regular court work (Civil, DRT, BIFR, High Court, Supreme Court etc.) in day time and dealing with numerous enactments as well as their intricacy and that too using the old technology of steno and books ultimately affecting the quality of pleadings as well as efficiency of work. The basic case therefore suffers with inherent weakness at the foundation itself.

(e) We could find solutions to the above problems by confining to specialization, using our self knowledge and experience of such industrial litigations combined with latest IT technology and confining ourselves to only the solicitor services though in bigger cases we also appear in DRT and conduct arguments. We keep in view the latest rulings of DRT, BIFR, High Courts and Supreme Court etc. On account of all these factors, the counter-claims drafted by us have been highly appreciated by our clients as well as their legal experts (including those in DRT, BIFR etc,) on account of utmost inherent quality.

(f) Our strategy is, first, to have  legally and technically strong pleadings in the counter-claim. Next with passage of time, to bring the officials of banks and financial institutions in the witness box and with proper use of the powerful tool of the cross-examination, to get all the wrong doings and violations admitted. In that eventuality, the role of the judge is just reduced to pass judgment in our favour only. With such approach only our clients have been successful in DRT, BIFR, Securitisation Act etc.

(g) It is needless to mention that availability of the legal defence in form of counter-claim prepares a solid negotiating ground for honourable settlement, if need so arises. The defendant borrowers and guarantors are safeguarded. The legal battle is strengthened at the foundation stage of DRT, BIFR and now NCLT and hence the subsequent appeals, if any, in the higher court are not one sided and hence take time for resolution. The intervening time offers a valuable time for restructuring of the business.

(h) It is needless to mention that the litigation is highly time consuming and expensive but those who can afford it, it definitely brings relief.

(i) On account of formation of NCLT, the court in lieu of BIFR the proceedings would be much faster as compared with BIFR. Hence it is all the more important for the parties to file and establish their counterclaims.

(j) In most of the cases handled by us, majority are having stays in DRT due to stay in BIFR. The new court in lieu of BIFR i.e. NCLT will vacate the said stays, It would be prudent for the parties to get the counter-claim prepared by us as it takes time to prepare the same.

(k) The foundation of legal provisions in BIFR in principle remain same in NCLT. Our specialization in industrial finance, DRT, BIFR, BIFR proceedings, rehabilitation plans in BIFR, appeal against BIFR orders, stay by BIFR etc have equipped us with rich knowledge and experience to prepare replies, written statements and counter-claims in DRT and to handle proceedings in NCLT and superior courts

[Back to Top]

(5) Prestigious Cases in pipe line:-

The party got an industrial license in 1987 to manufacture fax machines. It was first such license in the country. They started implementing the project. Since the governmental formalities were taking time, the party started trading activities by way of import and supply. The progress was quite satisfactory. In 1991, the government liberalized the import policies and the fax machines were brought under OGL. This had a great impact on the project which became sick. As usual the bank instead of helping started withdrawing. In the meantime, the bank officials and the party got involved in CBI investigation. Side by side proceedings commenced in BIFR and DRT. The party also tried to settle the dues but the bank could not take any decision. We have prepared the DRT reply and a counter-claim of Rs. 116.11 crores which is expected to be filed shortly. The BIFR has been duly informed. The proceedings of BIFR would continue before the NCLT, the court formed in lieu of BIFR.

We have several cases in pipe line at various stages which are as under:-

(a) A CA firm of Mumbai engaged in settlement of NPAs has approached us to handle the cases of their clients.

(b) We have now started receiving several cases for rendering legal opinion from different cities of the country.

(c) In several cases we have rendered our legal opinion, we are awaiting the decision of the parties for further action.

(d) There are ongoing cases of counter-claim where we have amended the pleading so as to incorporate the provisions of the law of torts.

(e) It is reiterated that the foundation of legal provisions in BIFR in principle remain same in NCLT. Our specialization in industrial finance, DRT, BIFR, BIFR proceedings, rehabilitation plans in BIFR, appeal against BIFR orders, stay by BIFR etc have equipped us with rich knowledge and experience to prepare replies, written statements and counter-claims in DRT and to handle proceedings in NCLT and superior courts.

(f) During Delhi and Ludhiana Visits we had queries from several parties who had filed counter-claim on their own. After discussions with us they were convinced to get their amended counter-claim drafted by us. We have started receiving cases from Ludhiana and Delhi for opinion. Several new parties desire personal discussions. Hence we visited Delhi, Chandigarh, Mumbai, and Ludhiana. Several parties are visiting us at Indore.

[Back to Top]

(6) Conclusion:-

(a) We are in this line since 1989. On account of our technical and legal background, we understand the project reports, balance sheets, accounts, intricacies of banking process and correspondence. This is the reason that we do not need any discussions with the parties. Our requirement is the documents only. Publication of our two articles and several mini-articles in form of letters to the editor combined with use of modern IT technology widened our area of interaction and professional services throughout the country..    

(b) We have decided to update our this web site www.drtsolutions.com every week on Monday We shall be collecting all the useful material during the week so that the same is submitted in our weekly update. In order to save the time of the regular visitors, we have introduced a separate page 'Update after last release' The update summary will also appear at the bottom of Home page which of course is same in all the pages. We shall welcome your comments and opinion through e-mail at our ID i.e. ramkishandrt@gmail.com  

(c) It is reiterated that the foundation of legal provisions in BIFR in principle remain same in NCLT. Our specialization in industrial finance, DRT, BIFR, BIFR proceedings, rehabilitation plans in BIFR, appeal against BIFR orders, stay by BIFR etc have equipped us with rich knowledge and experience to prepare replies, written statements and counter-claims in DRT and to handle proceedings in NCLT and superior courts

(c) We are thankful to our acquaintances and clients who are spreading the address of our web site to industrialists, businessmen, borrowers and guarantors as well as our message to the troubled DRT litigants not to be afraid of DRT or Securitisation Act but instead use the powerful tool of counter-claim. With our technology and strategy, the victory is definitely assured. You can speak to us any time on our off.-cum-res. phone +91-731-4049358 or Mobile 9691103689. Please avoid calls beyond 10 PM.

 [Back to Top]

Contact Information :-  

205, Morya Palace, Opp Bansi Trade Centre,

5/1, Diamond Colony, New Palasia,

Indore-452003

Mobile- 969-1103689, LL-731-4049358,