Recovery of debt — DRT has no jurisdiction to prohibit borrower from leaving country without prior permission of Tribunal — Constitution of India, Article 21 — Debts Recovery Tribunal Act, 1993.

The appellant State Bank of India preferred application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ahmedabad. Though a prayer was made to restrain the defendant borrowers from leaving India without prior permission of the DRT, originally no such order was passed.

The case was not decided for more than six years. After 6 years, the bank filed an interlocutory application for various interim reliefs including the direction to the Regional Passport Authorities to provide passport numbers and addresses of the defendant borrowers, for bringing them from the USA to India and for a direction to surrender the passports. Further prayer was made to direct the defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 not to leave India without prior permission of the DRT. The DRT, passed certain interim orders and also restrained defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 from leaving India without prior permission of the Tribunal. The borrowers preferred appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal in its order observed that the borrowers, had not approached the Tribunal for seeking permission to leave the country, and further observed that they could approach the DRT, justifying the travel abroad and seek permission accordingly. At this stage the borrowers filed a writ petition holding that — DRT had no power to control physical movements or to impound the passport. The bank filed appeal against this order.

The Court observed that Article 21 of the Constitution safeguards the right to go abroad against executive interference which is not supported by law; and law here means ‘enacted law’ or ‘State law’. Thus, no person can be deprived of his right to go abroad unless there is a law made by the state prescribing the procedure for so depriving him and the deprivation is effected strictly in accordance with such procedure.

Sub-sections (12), (13A), (17) and (18) of section 19 do not empower the Tribunal to issue any prohibitory order prohibiting the borrower from leaving the country without prior permission. Section 22 deals with the procedure and powers of the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal. It relates to summoning and enforcing the attendance, requiring the discovery and production of documents, receiving evidence on affidavits, issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents, reviewing its decisions, dismissing an application for default or deciding it ex parte, setting aside any order of dismissal of any application for default or any order passed by it ex parte, or any other matter which may be prescribed, but no provision has been made therein or by a separate Notification issued by the Central Govt. empowering the Tribunal to deprive a person of his personal liberty to move abroad as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In absence of any such ‘Enacted Law’ or ‘State Law’, it was held that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to deprive the defendants, the respondents herein, of their right to go abroad.