1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 123 OF 2005 Kemen Springs Private Limited & Ors. ... Petitioners Versus Bank of Baroda ...Respondent Mr. Shyam Diwan with Mr. K.R. Khata instructed by M/s. Dhru & Co. for the Petitioners Mr. Rabindra Hazari for the Respondent. CORAM: DALVEER BHANDARI, C.J., & DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. DATE: AUGUST 23, 2005. P.C.:- 1. In this petition, the petitioners are challenging the orders of the Debts Recovery Tribunal and the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, rejecting the petitioners' application for direction to the respondent, Bank of Baroda, to provide 5 missing bank statements. 2. The details of missing bank statements are as follows:- 2 1. Term Loan 2 : 22-2-1984 to 1-4-1988 2. Term Loan 3 : 22-6-1985 to 31-3-1988 3. Term Loan 4 : Nil 4. Book Debt 70132 : 14-7-1983 to 31-12-1987 5. Hypothecation 70139 : 27-2-1984 to 31-3-1989 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. We would not like to spend judicial time in adjudicating the controversy whether, in fact, the respondent should provide the missing bank statements or not, because the learned counsel appearing for the bank has agreed to supply the missing bank statements to the petitioners on payment of usual charges. In view of this statement of the learned counsel for the respondent, no further directions are necessary in this petition. 4. As a matter of fact, at the very first instance, the bank should have provided the missing bank statements, so that the bank could have avoided delay of the petitioners' approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal and this Court. At times, a reasonable and pragmatic approach can avert unnecessary and avoidable litigation. 5. This petition is accordingly disposed of. CHIEF JUSTICE DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.