ORDER : S. Manikumar, J. 1. M/s. Hamosons Apparels (P) Ltd., Chennai, a partnership firm, borrowed loan from Indian Bank, Chennai, first respondent. One of the co-owners of the property, comprised in land and building, situated at No.2, Old No.15, Rutlan Gate, 5th Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 034, Abdul Razak Osman, Managing Partner of Hamosons Apparels (P) Ltd., offered the said property, as security, in favour of Indian Bank, Asset Asset Recovery/Management Branch, Chennai. 2. Mrs. Shirin Iqbal, writ petitioner, in W.P.Nos.1907 to 1910 of 2017, executed a Deed of Guarantee, on 13/8/1991 and stood as guarantor, but according to the petitioner, the Deed of Guarantee has not been invoked and expired. Mrs. Munira Haroon, writ petitioner, in W.P.Nos.1911 to 1914 of 2017, also stood as guarantor, for the loan availed by M/s. Hamosons and also executed a Deed of Guarantee, on 13/8/1991. 3. For the default, Bank filed O.A.Nos.1214, 1371, 1217 of 2011 and 53 of 2004, respectively, before the Debts Recovery Tribunal - II, Chennai, impleading the borrower and the above said guarantors. 4. After adjudication, the Debts Recovery Tribunal, issued recovery certificate in each of the OAs as detailed hereunder:- O.A.NO. (BEFORE RT) NAME OF THE BORROWER SUIT AMOUNT RECOVERY CERTIFICATE DRAT APPEAL CONDITI-ONAL ORDER AMOUNT PAID BY BORROWER O.A.No.1214 of 2001 Hamasons Apparels (P) Ltd 80,61,223.27 + 59,73,682 1,11,34,944 2.51 crores with interest 459/2013 8,00,000/- O.A.No.1371 of 2001 Hamosons 17.21 laks 61.00 lakhs 457/2013 4,50,000/- O.A.No.1217 of 2001 Hanif Bros 31.31 lakhs 33.64 lakhs 458/2013 8,00,000/- O.A.No.53 of 2004 H.M.Hajee Moosa 4.86 lakhs 32 lakhs 460/2013 1,25,000/- 5. Material on record discloses that being aggrieved by the final orders made in each of the original Applications, the borrower and guarantor have filed A.I.R.Nos.457 of 2013 to 460 of 2013, respectively. 6. Mrs. Shirin Iqbal, guarantor/writ petitioner in W.P.Nos.1907 to 1910 of 2018, filed I.A.Nos.855 to 858 of 2013 in A.I.R.Nos.507 to 510 of 2013 for waiver of pre-deposit. Mrs.Munira Haroon/writ petitioner in W.P.Nos.1911 to 1914 of 2018, filed I.A.Nos.871 to 874 of 2013, for waiver of pre-deposit. 7. Vide order, dated 21/9/2017, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, directed the appellants, viz., Mrs.Shirin Iqbal and Munira Haroon, to make a pre-deposit of Rs.8 lakhs, with the Registrar of the Tribunal, within a period of four weeks, from 21/9/2017. Mrs.Munira Haroon/writ petitioner in W.P.Nos.1911 to 1914 of 2018, filed I.A.Nos.871 to 874 of 2013, for waiver of pre-deposit. 7. Vide order, dated 21/9/2017, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, directed the appellants, viz., Mrs.Shirin Iqbal and Munira Haroon, to make a pre-deposit of Rs.8 lakhs, with the Registrar of the Tribunal, within a period of four weeks, from 21/9/2017. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, has further directed that in the event of failure in complying with the order on pre-deposit, the appeals shall stand dismissed, automatically without any further reference to the Tribunal and posted the matters, on 20/10/2017, for confirmation. 8. Subsequently, on 20/10/2017, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, has dismissed the appeals as hereunder:- “Appellant counsel fairly concedes that he has not complied with the orders on pre-deposit and prays for some more time as they have preferred writ before Hon'ble High Court. In view of the fact that DRAT cannot entertain any appeal filed by any aggrieved person unless and until the appellant complies with the formalities on pre-deposit, also no stay order from Hon'ble High Court is produced today. As pre-deposit is not complied with, hence appeal stands dismissed for want of compliance on pre-deposit. It is made clear that if any direction is passed by Hon'ble High Court, this Tribunal will take up the matter suo-moto or by an application, as the case may be, for compliance.” 9. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of the appeals, Mrs.Shirin Iqbal, has filed W.P.Nos.1907 to 1910 of 2018 and Mrs.Munira Haroon has filed W.P.Nos.1911 to 1914 of 2018. 10. One of the contentions raised in the instant writ petitions to set aside the orders impugned is that when the borrowers, had already made a pre-deposit of Rs.8 lakhs, as directed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, there is no need for a direction to the guarantors, to make pre-deposit of Rs.8 lakhs, in each of the appeals, preferred by them. 11. By inviting the attention of this Court to the amount mentioned in the Debts Recovery Tribunal Certificate Rs.32 lakhs, submission was made that direction to the guarantors to make pre-deposit of Rs.8 lakhs each with the Registrar of the appellate forum, in addition to the direction issued to the borrowers to deposit would exceed the amount mentioned in the Debts Recovery Certificate. 12. 12. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Tribunal has mechanically passed orders, both in I.As and A.I.Rs, without considering the contention of the guarantors that the conditional order has been complied with. 13. On the above submissions, yesterday, when the matter came up for hearing, we directed Ms.Ananda Gomathy, learned counsel for the petitioners, to file necessary documents to substantiate deposit made by the borrower. 14. Proceeding of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, dated 21/9/2017, in A.I.R.Nos.457 to 460 of 2013, submitted today, as proof of compliance by the borrower, are extracted hereunder:- CASE No. CAUSE TITLE PROCEEDINGS A.I.R.No.457 of 2013 M/s. Hamosons & Ors Vs. Indian Bank & Ors Ld. Counsel Mr.K.Krishnamoorthy for Appellants present. Ld. Counsel Mr. M.P. Balasubramanian for R.1 Bank present. Order of Pre-deposit has been complied. Registry is directed to number the appeal. In view of the fact that order on pre-deposit has been complied with, parties are directed to maintain status-quo. List for final hearing on 15/11/2017. A.I.R.No.458 of 2013 M/s. Hanif Bros & Ors Vs. Indian Bank & Ors A.I.R.No.459 of 2013 M/s. Homosons Apparels (P) Ltd & Ors Vs. Indian Bank & Ors A.I.R.No.460 of 2013 M/s. H.M.Hajee Moosa & Ors Vs. Indian Bank & Ors. 15. Perusal of the proceeding, dated 21/9/2017, by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, directing pre-deposit of Rs.8 lakhs, with the Registrar of the Tribunal shows that though a contention has been made by the learned counsel for the guarantors that the borrower has also challenged the final order made in S.A.No.37 of 2007 and complied with the pre-deposit and that there is no need for the guarantors, once again, to make pre-deposit, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, has not considered the said submission at all, on the other and, only taken note of the fact that the DRC is pending for Rs.32 lakhs and hence directed the guarantors, to make pre-deposit of Rs.8 lakhs, in each of the appeals filed. 16. Without adverting to the submission that pre-deposit has already been made by the borrowers, order has been passed. There cannot be any repetition of pre-deposit. 17. For the reasons stated supra, we are of the view that the order impugned in the instant writ petitions, deserve to be set aside and accordingly, set aside. 18. In the result, all the writ petitions are allowed. There cannot be any repetition of pre-deposit. 17. For the reasons stated supra, we are of the view that the order impugned in the instant writ petitions, deserve to be set aside and accordingly, set aside. 18. In the result, all the writ petitions are allowed. Registrar of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, is directed to scrutinise the appeals filed by the guarantors, assign regular appeal numbers, if they are otherwise in order and place the same before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, as expeditiously as possible. No costs.