Shiv Raj Singh and Ors. v. Bank Of Baroda and Ors.

DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI

Appeal No.51/2022 Arising out of S.A.No.203/2018(DRT, Jaipur)

Shiv Raj Singh & Ors. Vs Bank of Baroda & Ors.

03.06.2022 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Brijesh Sethi

Present: Ms. Seema Sindhu, Ld. Counsel for appellants

Mr. Arun Aggarwal, Ld. Counsel for respondent bank

This matter has been taken up by me through Video Conferencing.

Notice. Mr. Arun Aggarwal, learned counsel, has appeared on behalf of the respondent bank. He accepts notice. Let copy of the appeal paper book be supplied to him within a week. He seeks time to file reply. Let reply be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.

The learned counsel for the appellants states that the property in question has been put to sale and bids have been received but she is not aware of the stage at which the present proceedings are pending. She, therefore, prays that further proceedings may be stayed.

On the point of limitation, the learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants had filed an application for review of the impugned order dated 27.08.2019 which came to be disposed of on 21.09.2019. She further submits that on the basis of the legal advice, the appellants again filed an application for review, which also met with the same fate on 30.04.2022. She states that the time taken by the appellants pursuing their review applications before the DRT may be excluded while calculating the limitation period and the limitation may be reckoned from the date of dismissal of the second review petition, i.e. 30.04.2022. Regarding pre-deposit, the learned counsel for the appellants states that that all the dues of the bank stand paid and, therefore, the appellants need not deposit any amount towards pre-deposit.