Judgment :- S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. The petitioners, who are the guarantors, have challenged the order dated 27. 2008 passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai. 2. It appears that the petitioners, while preferring an appeal, sought waiver of deposit requisite under Section 21 of the RDDB & FI Act, 1993. Having noticed the submission and claim of the bank in O.A. for Rs.2,37,50,050.48, the petitioners have been directed to deposit a sum of Rs.50,00,000/-with the bank in two instalments within the stipulated period. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that against the very same order of the DRAT, the borrowers (second and third respondents herein) have also preferred an appeal and pursuant to the order of appellate Tribunal, they have also deposited a sum of Rs.1.00 crore, which is approximately 40% of the due amount. Therefore, the appellate Tribunal ought not to have directed the petitioners to deposit another sum of Rs.50.00 lacs, which would exceed the maximum limit prescribed under the proviso to Section 21 of the RDDB & FI Act, 1993. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent Bank submitted that the petitioners have not brought on record the evidence to suggest that the second and third respondents have deposited a sum of Rs.1.00 crore with the bank, pursuant to the claim of Rs.2,37,50,050.48 and therefore, without going into the evidence, this Court should not interfere with the order. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and their rival contentions. 6. In person, we find no evidence has been produced to show that the borrowers have deposited a sum of Rs.1.00 crore pursuant to the order of the appellate Tribunal in connection with the same claim of the Bank. Hence, we are not inclined to go into that question. 7. However, liberty is given to the petitioners to bring the above fact to the notice of the appellate Tribunal, Chennai. If any such affidavit is filed by the petitioners within seven days, enclosing the evidence in support of the claim or reference of the case pursuant to which the borrowers have deposited the amount, the Appellate Tribunal, on being satisfied, may vary the impugned order dated 27. 2008. 8. If any such affidavit is filed by the petitioners within seven days, enclosing the evidence in support of the claim or reference of the case pursuant to which the borrowers have deposited the amount, the Appellate Tribunal, on being satisfied, may vary the impugned order dated 27. 2008. 8. It is needless to say that if the borrowers have deposited a sum of Rs.1.00 crore, then in such case, the petitioners are entitled to count the said amount for the purpose of grant of waiver. The parties are also directed to cooperate with the appellate Tribunal for early disposal of the appeals.