Smt D Naga Sunanda Devi v. Canara Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
The Delhi tribunal disposed of an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. It held that the appeal was filed within time, considering the time consumed to obtain the certified copy, dismissing the registry's note on the appeal being time-barred.
What did the court decide?
Application I.A. 109 of 2021 for condonation of delay was allowed; appeal deemed to be filed in time.
What the court decided
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
Diary No. 208 of 2020
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON
13.06.2023 Smt. D. Naga Sundana Devi & Another … Appellants -VsAuthorised Officer, Canara Bank & 2 Others … Respondents
Mr. M. Narasimha Rao, Learned Counsel for Appellants
Ms. Aparajita Ghosh with Mr. Souvik Ghosh, Learned Counsel for Respondents No. 1 and 2/Bank
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
I.A. 109 of 2021
Application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
Impugned order was passed on 28th January, 2020 while the appeal was filed on 2nd March, 2020. Registry has wrongly submitted a note that the appeal is time barred. Time consumed in obtaining the certified copy was also considered. Accordingly, the appeal was filed in time.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal is barred by limitation despite a registration note stating it is time-barred.
Whether the time taken to obtain the certified copy should be considered while condoning delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
D. Naga Sundana Devi
- appellant
Another
- respondent
Authorised Officer, Canara Bank
- respondent
2 Others
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · June
- CNR
- 191090002082020
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
13 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court