Mr Satish Kumar v. Canara Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal denied condonation of delay for an appeal filed 100 days after the impugned order. The bench, finding the appellant's explanation that they learned of the order via counsel insufficient, dismissed the application for condonation and the subsequent appeal as time-barred.
What did the court decide?
Application for condonation of delay and the appeal are dismissed. Trial Court order is modified to insert Section 21 of the RDB Act instead of Section 18(2) of SARFAESI Act.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
Diary No. 29 of 2020
(Arising out of O.A. 29 of 2018 in DRT-I, Hyderabad)
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON
| 27.04.2023 | M. Satish Kumar & Another .. Appellants -Vs- Canara Bank & 2 Others ... Respondents |
|---|---|
| Mr. Nemani Srinivas, Learned Counsel for the Appellants |
|
| Mr. Archan Dutt with Mr. Ayan Kumar Boral and Mr. Subhadip |
|
| Basu, Learned Counsel for Respondent Bank |
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
I.A. 18 of 2020
Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
The instant Appeal, being Diary No. 29 of 2020, is filed by the Appellant, who is Defendant in the O.A. 29 of 2018, against an order dated 30th September, 2019 passed in I.A. 2243 of 2019 dismissing the application for recall of the ex parte order. This application was also moved with a delay of 291 days and the Learned DRT, while passing the impugned order dated 30th September, 2019, dismissed the same.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellant has shown sufficient cause under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone a 100-day delay in filing the appeal.
Whether the appellant's failure to seek recall of the ex parte order within a specified period demonstrates intent to linger on proceedings.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
M. Satish Kumar
- respondent
Canara Bank
Coram
Anil Kumar Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · April
- CNR
- 191090000292020
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
12 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court