The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appellant's application for condonation of delay of 1140 days in filing an appeal against an impugned DRT order, accepting the reasons of bona fide litigation and the Supreme Court order extending limitation. The appeal was taken on record.
Application for condonation of delay allowed; Appeal taken on record.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT : MUMBAI Present : Mr. Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson
I.A. No.77/2021
In
Appeal on Diary No. 278/2021
Between
Rajesh Narottamdas Sanghavi … Appellant/s V/s.
Bank of India & 13 Ors. …Respondent/s
Mr. Rajesh Nagori, i/b Mr. Wadia Ghandy & Co., Advocate for Appellant.
-: Order dated : 17/06/2022 :-
Respondents have been served but none appeared and hence Respondents are set ex-parte in I.A. which is an application for condonation of delay.
Heard learned counsel appearing the Appellant.
The impugned order dated 22.02.20218 of the D.R.T.-I, Ahmedabad, in I.A. No. 339/2018 in O.A. No. 392/2017 is challenged in this Appeal at Diary No. 278/2021 and there is a delay of 1140 days noticed by the Registry. In the application and the accompanying affidavit, the reasons for delay is that after disposal of the I.A. No. 339/2018 in O.A. No. 394/2017, the Appellant allegedly approached the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad by filing R/Special Civil Application No. 5671/2018 and he also obtained stay of the operation of the said order and thereafter the Civil Application before the Hon’ble High Court continued and was ultimately disposed of on 16.03.2021 directing the Appellant to approach this Appellate Tribunal. However, the protection was extended for a further period of six weeks and
thereafter the Appellant approached this Tribunal and filed this Appeal along with the application for condonation of delay.
The Appellant states that the period in which he was bonafide litigating before the Hon’ble High Court needs to be excluded, and thereafter, he seeks benefit of the order dated 10.01.2022 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in M.A. No. 21/2022 in M.A. No. 665/2021 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020 which clearly states that period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Section 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribed period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings. Ld. Counsel for Appellant submitted that because of the pandemic situation the Appeal could not be filed within the stipulated time.
Under the circumstances, the Appellant would be entitled to get the entire period of delay condoned.
On going through the records, the application for condonation of delay and the accompanying Affidavit, I find that the delay has been properly explained and hence the application for condonation of delay stands allowed.
The Registry is directed to take the Appeal on record, if there are no defects to be cured.
Post on 13.07.2022 before the Registrar for compliance.
Sd/Chairperson
dpj-2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the reason for the 1140 days delay in filing the appeal is bona fide litigation before the High Court and the operative Supreme Court order excluding the pandemic period.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
M.A. No. 21/2022 in M.A. No. 665/2021 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020Relied on¶14
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Rajesh Narottamdas Sanghavi
Bank of India
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
