IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 11645 of 2009 Between: Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited, Hyderabad Branch represented by its Chief Manager, at 15.02.696, First Floor, Siddiamber Bazar, Kishan Gunj, Hyderabad - 500 012. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Debts Recovery Tribunal V Floor, Triveni Complex (Palace Heights) Abids, Hyderabad, represented by its Registrar. 2 M/s. Dhanalakshmi Multi Color Xerox A proprietory concern, represented by its Proprietrix Smt T.Nageswaramma W/o.T.V.Rathna Rao 6-1063/1/3, Opp: RR District Collectorate Lakdikapool, Hyderabad - 500 004. 3 Smt.T.Nageswaramma W/o.T.V. Rathna Rao 6-1063/1/3, Opp: RR District Collectorate Lakdikapool, Hyderabad - 500 004. 4 Sri.T.V.Rathna Rao S/o.T.S.Krishna Murty 6-1063/1/3, Opp: RR District Collectorate Lakdikapool, Hyderabad - 500 004. 5 Sri.T.V.Ramakrishna Raju S/o.T.S.Krishna Murty 6-1063/1/3, Opp: RR District Collectorate Lakdikapool, Hyderabad - 500 004. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue Writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the order in IA No.1103/2008 in OA No.214/200 dated 8.3.2009 as illegal against the public interest and violative of article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and set aside the same directing the Respondent No.1 to permit the petitioner herein to produce its witness for cross examination by the Respondent No.2 to 5 by re-opening the petitioner's evidence or pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.BHASKARA RAO BANDARUPALLI Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.NO. 11645 OF 2009 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) 1. This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the order in I.A.No. 1103 of 2008 In O.A. No. 214 of 2000 dated 8.3.2009 as illegal against the public interest and violative of Articles 14 and 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India and set aside the same directing the respondent No.1 to permit the petitioner to produce its witness for cross- examination by the respondents 2 to 5 by re-opening the petitioner’s evidence. 2. An application being OA No. 214 of 2000 is pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad filed by the writ petitioner-bank. When the case was coming up for trial, on 20.11.2003 the writ petitioner-bank has adduced its evidence by filing evidence affidavit of AW-1 and the respondents also led their evidence by filing their evidence affidavit on 25.5.2004 and thereafter it appears that AW-1 was not produced for cross-examination for more than three years and hence the evidence on behalf of the writ petitioner-bank was closed on 16.4.2008. An application was filed by the writ petitioner-bank before the Debts Recovery Tribunal to reopen its evidence and permit them to produce AW-1 for cross-examination by the respondents 2 to 5. By the impugned order, the said application was dismissed. Hence this writ petition. 3. The respondents 2 to 5 have contested this matter by filing their counter-affidavit. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner- bank has contended that there was communication gap between the petitioner-bank and its counsel and as such the witness could not be produced and the Tribunal ought not to have closed the evidence of the writ petitioner-bank. He has also submitted that the cross-examination of witness is only sought to ensure the right of the respondents to cross- examine the witness and to contest the case on merits. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel that ends of justice would be met if the writ petitioner-bank is permitted to produce AW-1 for cross- examination, however by imposing costs of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) on the writ petitioner- bank. 6. Accordingly we set aside the impugned order of the 1st respondent by imposing costs of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) on the writ petitioner-bank payable to the respondents 2 to 5 on or before 22.8.2009 and we allow the writ petitioner-bank to produce AW-1 before the 1st respondent for the purpose of cross-examination by the respondents 2 to 5, on 27.8.2009 to which date the matter is reported to have been posted before the Tribunal. If the amount is not paid within the time stipulated above, the impugned order shall stand restored and the order of the Tribunal closing the evidence on behalf of writ petitioner- bank shall remain operative. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. Dt. 28.7.2009 __________ KR GMJ _________ VVAJ ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}