1 4521.sxw ast IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4521 OF 2010 The ING Vysya Bank Ltd .. Petitioner vs HDFC Bank Ltd & ors .. Respondents -- Mr.Nikhil Sakhardande with Mr.B.Palav i.b Amarchand & Mangaldas & Mr.S.A.Shroff & Co for Petitioner. Mr.S.R.Ganbavle for Respondent nos. 5 & 6 Mr.Chirag Balsara with Ms Hena Desai i.b Sanghi & Co for Respondent no.1 CORAM : D.D.SINHA & MRS MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ DATE : 14 th June, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned respondent counsel for respondent no.1. 2. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 10.5.2010 passed by the D.R.A.T.Mumbai whereby the application of the petitioner for waiver of the deposit as contemplated under section 21 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 came to be rejected. 3. In the instant case, the challenge raised by the petitioner in prayer clause (a) has not been pressed in action, and therefore the issue in this regard is 2 4521.sxw kept open. Considered the contentions raised by the respective counsel and perused the impugned order. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the main ground raised by the petitioner in the application under section 21 of the Act is reflected in para 2 of the impugned order which reads as under : It has been stated by the Appellant Bank that its total assets exceeded 1322 billons Euros, employed over 125000 people, served over 85 million customers, across 50 countries. Therefore, it is prayed that the pre-deposit condition as required under section 21 of the RDDDB & FI Act for hearing of the appeal is not applicable to such a Bank. Be3sides it has also pleaded that judgment under the trial is erroneous on merit. 4. We have perused the provisions of section 21 of the Act, it does not make any distinction between an ordinary individual and a bank and contemplates that where an appeal is preferred by a person from whom amount of debt is due to a bank or a financial institution or consent of a bank or a financial institution, such appeal shall not be entertained by the appellate tribunal unless such a person has deposited with the appellate tribunal 75% of the amount of debt due from him as determined by the tribunal under section 19. 5. A plain reading of the provision makes it evident that both an individual or a bank stands on the same footing and therefore, the ground raised by the 3 4521.sxw petitioner in the application under section 21 of the Act,referred to herein above, is misconceived and devoid of substance. Consequently,the impugned order is just and proper and no interference is called for. It is brought to the notice of this court that amount of deposit has been reduced to approximately 25 % from 75%. In these circumstances, no case made out for showing indulgence. Writ petition is dismissed. 6. Counsel for the petitioner prays that a weeks time from today to make the said deposit as directed by the impugned order may kindly be granted. In the interest of justice, we grant one week s time for the said purpose with the understanding that no further time will be granted in this regard. D.D.SINHA, J MRS MRIDULA BHATKAR, J