Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Ramesh Chandra Dash and Ors.

DRAT17 Mar 2023REGULAR APPEAL/57/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application for condonation of delay, the Tribunal referred to a Supreme Court order excluding the COVID-19 period from limitation calculations. Rejecting reliance on a contrary Supreme Court order, the Tribunal held the delay was sufficient to condone and allowed the application.

What did the court decide?

Application for condonation of delay allowed; appeal registered.

Bank of Baroda versus Ramesh Chandra Dash and Ors. — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

¶2

Diary No. 278 of 2021 (Arising out of S.A. 74 of 2020 in DRT, Cuttack)

¶3

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶4

CHAIRPERSON

¶5

17.03.2023 Bank of Baroda & Another … Appellants -VsRamesh Chandra Dash & 3 Others … Respondents Mr. Dipanjan Datta, Learned Counsel for Appellants

¶6

Mr. Rajib Rath, Learned Counsel for Respondents

¶7

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶8

I.A. 220 of 2021

¶9

Application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Opposition filed by Respondent is taken on record.

¶10

Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶11

Impugned order was passed on 19^th January, 2021 while appeal was filed on 24^th March, 2021. Application for certified copy was filed after expiry of the period of appeal hence no exemption can be granted in favour of the Appellant. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the delay was during the Covid period and the case is squarely covered under the Hon’ble Apex Court order in Misc. Appeal No. 665 of 2021 in SMW(C) No. 3 of 2020 dated 23^rd September, 2021.

¶12

Per contra, Learned Counsel for the Respondent opposes the prayer and places reliance upon an order of the Hon’ble Apex Court, in the matter of State of Madhya Pradesh -vs- Bherulal decided on 15^th October, 2020, as referred to in paragraph 3 of the opposition to the application.

¶13

¶14

As far as the facts of the present case are concerned, it is squarely covered under the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Misc. Appeal No. 665 of 2021 in SMW(C) No. 3 of 2020 dated 23^rd September, 2021 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has held as under:

¶15

“1. In computing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal, application or proceeding, the period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 shall stand excluded. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 15.03.2020, if any, shall become available with effect from 15.03.2021.

¶16

2. In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 15.03.2021. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 15.03.2021, is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply.

¶17

3. The period from 15.03.2020 till 14.03.2021 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections 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 prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay) and termination of proceedings.”

¶18

Hence the Respondent cannot take advantage of the orders of the Hon’ble Apex Court passed in the matter of State of Madhya Pradesh -vs- Bherulal. Accordingly, I find the ground to be sufficient for condoning the delay.

¶19

¶20

The application, being I.A. 220 of 2021, is allowed by condoning the

¶21

delay.

¶22

Appeal be registered by providing regular appeal number. Opposition be filed within four weeks with advance copy to the Appellant; rejoinder, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.

¶23

List on 21^st June, 2023 for hearing of the appeal.

¶24

(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson

¶25

Dated: 17^th March, 2023 14/ac

Bank of Baroda v. Ramesh Chandra Dash and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Ramesh Chandra Dash and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vasantha Arumugam versus South Indian Bank

Ms Eluri Co. operative Urban Bank Ltd. versus Sri Gajavalli Kishore

Ms Vibha Agrotech Limited And Others versus Punjab National Bank

Swadesh Ranjan Das versus Ao Bangiya Gramin Vikas Bank

Smt N Deepa versus Union Bank of India

Manne Srinivas versus State Bank of India