Rama Kant Upmanyu vs State Bank Of India on 25 October, 2002
4. The learned Counsel for the parties were heard on this point at length. Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate submitted that after deletion of second relief the appellant has only challenged the order passed by Tribunal rejecting his application under Order IX, Rule 13 of C.P.C. through which no amount of debt due has been determined, therefore, compliance of Section 21 is not to be made in this appeal. He submitted that this question arose in a writ petition filed by Gemini Arts (P) Ltd. v. Indian Bank, and the Hon'ble High Court, Madras took the view that the requirement to deposit "determined" amount while filing the appeal could arise only in appeal against the final orders and not in other appeals against order under Section 19(6) of the Act. Mr. Murari submitted that this judgment throws light on this subject.