Application filed to condone 32-day delay in filing restoration application due to clerical error and technical glitch. delay condoned and application allowed.
Delay of 32 days in filing restoration application is condoned.
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.
DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL-MUMBAI (SITTING AT-CHENNAI) . LA. No. 199/2025 (CoD) In M.A. Dy.Nd. .2225/2024. (Restoration) In [Inward No. Il/2O23-Di8nu8scd) Dated: 19.06.2025 This Application-is filed to condone delay of 32 days in filing the restoration Application in Misc.. Application in Diary No. 2225/2024; It is seen from the Affidavit filed-in support .of Petition that Pctitioners/Appellants filed Appeal in Inward No. 11/2023 challenging the order passed by Learned Presiding Officer; DRT111, .Mumbai in O.A. No. 50/2011 Along with an Application in I.A. .No;.269/'2023, to condone delay. The delay cohdohatioii Application in I.A. No. 269/2023 was.listed <?n 12.08.2024. Leafhed Chairperson, DRAT, Mumbai was on leave on that date, and the case waa adjourned to 13.09.2024,' and the clcrk.had given the date as 1-3.09.2024; but the advocate wrongly noted the date as 23.09.2024. Therefore, Learned Counsel for Petitloncrs/Appcilants could not appear in Court on 13.09.2024 and delay condonation application in t.A. No. 269/2023 was dismissed..
Order dated 13.09.2024 passed in U. No. 269/2023 -was uploaded On 10.10.2024. Dueto technical glitch, it .could,not be detected by the filing Section. Therefore, physical, copy could not be taken. These factors contributed delay of 32 days in filing the Application to condone the delay .in restoring Misc. Application f Dy. No. 2225/2024.
| representation for Respondent No. 1 Bank. Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 had already been given up. Despite service Of notice to Respondent No.l, there is no |
|
|---|---|
| [ | In the said circumstances 'Stated by Learned Counsel for Pctitioners/Appcllants 'and satisfied -with the reason stated in the Affidavit filed in support of the Petition, the delay of 32 days in filing the restoration Application is condoned. |
| Accordingly, I.A. No. 199/2025 is allowed. | |
| MKS CHAIRPERSOWORAL OH EMN Al (IN-OIAROE. DRAT.MUMBAIj |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of 32 days in filing the restoration application is condonable.
Petitioners/Appellants
Respondent No. 1 Bank
MKS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
