Disposed

Ganeriwal Gautam v. Bandla Ganesh Babu

DRAT3 Jul 2025MISC APPEAL/58/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal permitted a delay condonation application for the appellant to file a miscellaneous appeal. It waived the pre-deposit requirement as the appellant was an auction purchaser. The Tribunal disposed of the appeal directly, directing the lower court to decide the underlying securitisation application within four weeks with a hearing opportunity.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 13-day delay; waiver of pre-deposit; direction to lower court to decide the Securitisation Application within four weeks with a hearing.

Ganeriwal Gautam versus Bandla Ganesh Babu — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2025)

¶1

Reportable/Non-Reportable

¶2

Misc. Appeal Dy. No.211 of 2025 -DRAT-Kolkata

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT

¶4

KOLKATA

¶5

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON

¶6

Misc. Appeal Dy. No. 211 of 2025 (Arising out of I.A. 3502 of 2024 in S.A. No. 300 of 2022 in DRT-II, Hyderabad)

¶7

Mr. Ganeriwala Gautam, 7-1-39, Flat No. 1001, Shyam Karan Rao, Sriniketan Apartments, Ameerpet, Hyderabad – 500016.

¶8

-Versus-

¶9

1. Mr. Bandla Ganesh Babu, H. No. 18-190/1, Opp Saibaba Temple, Main Road, Shadnagar, Ranga Reddy, Telangana 509216.

¶10

2. Mr. Bandla Shiva Babu, H. No. 18-190/1, Opp Saibaba Temple, Main Road, Shadnagar, Ranga Reddy, Telangana – 509216.

¶11

3. Mr. Bandla Nageswara Rao, H. No. 18-190/1, Opp Saibaba Temple, Main Road, Shadnagar, Ranga Reddy, Telangana – 509216.

¶12

4. Mrs. Bandla Seetharavamma No. 18-190/1, Opp Saibaba Temple, Main Road, Shadnagar, Ranga Reddy, Telangana – 509216.

¶13

5. Union Bank of India, The Manager, Stressed Asset Management Branch, Union Bank of India, Hyderabad, having its branch situated at 3^rd Floor, Andhra Bank Building, Sultan Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad – 500095.

¶14

….Respondents

¶15

Counsel for Appellants Mr. Anujit Mukherjee, Mr. Prithish Chandra, Learned Counsel Counsel for Respondents Mr. K. Aroah, Learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

¶16

¶17

Misc. Appeal Dy. No.211 of 2025 -DRAT-Kolkata Mr. P.K. Mukherjee, Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 5

¶18

JUDGMENT : 3^rd July, 2025

¶19

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶20

Supplementary affidavit filed by the Appellant is taken on record. I.A. No. 118 of 2025 Application under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 13 days in filing the Appeal. Instant Appeal is filed against an order dated 20^th December, 2024. Appeal is filed on 24^th February, 2025. It is submitted that the delay is not intentional. Rather, it is caused due to the reason for contacting their concerned Counsel.

¶21

2. Opposed by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

¶22

3. Having considered the submissions made by the Learned Counsel, I found the ground to be sufficient.

¶23

4. Accordingly, I.A. No. 118 of 2025 is allowed. Delay in filing the Appeal is condoned.

¶24

5. I.A. No. 119 of 2025 Application for waiver from making pre deposit under Section 18(1) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Appellant herein is an auction purchaser who is not required to make a pre deposit to maintain the Appeal under Section 18 (1) of the Act. Accordingly, I.A. No. 119 of 2025 stands disposed of.

¶25

¶26

Misc. Appeal Dy. No.211 of 2025 -DRAT-Kolkata 6. Admit the Appeal by providing a regular appeal number.

¶27

7. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellant as well as Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Respondent No. 5 and perused the record.

¶28

8. Instant Appeal has been preferred against an order dated 20^th December, 2024 passed by Learned DRT-2 Hyderabad whereby I.A. No. 3502 of 2024 in S.A. No. 300 of 2022 for vacation of the status quo order passed in I.A. No. 1698 of 2024 dated 13.06.2024 was dismissed.

¶29

9. At the very outset, it is submitted by the Learned Counsel for parties that the Securitisation Application is listed for final hearing on 8^th July, 2024 before the Learned DRT wherein an order of status quo is in force. Learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 submits that he is prepared to press the S.A. on the date fixed and shall not seek any adjournment. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that if the Securitisation Application No. 300 of 2022 is finally disposed of within a stipulated period, then he has no grievance subject to reserving his rights.

¶30

10. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the matter, Appeal is disposed of with a direction to Learned DRT -2 Hyderabad to decide the S.A. No. 300 of 2022 which is fixed on 8^th July, 2025 either on the date fixed and if it is not possible then within a period of four weeks positively after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Learned DRT-2 Hyderabad on the date fixed i.e. on 8^th

¶31

¶32

Misc. Appeal Dy. No.211 of 2025 -DRAT-Kolkata July, 2025. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Learned DRT-2 Hyderabad forthwith.

¶33

ORDER

¶34

Misc. Appeal Dy. No. 211 of 2025 is disposed of with a direction to Learned DRT -2 Hyderabad to decide the S.A. No. 300 of 2022 which is fixed on 8^th July, 2025 either on the date fixed and if it is not possible then within a period of four weeks positively after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Learned DRT-2 Hyderabad on the date fixed i.e. on 8^th July, 2025.

¶35

Registry is directed to communicate this order to the Learned DRT-2 Hyderabad forthwith.

¶36

No Order as to costs.

¶37

File be consigned to Record Room.

¶38

Copy of the order be supplied to Appellant and the Respondents and a copy be also forwarded to the concerned DRT.

¶39

Copy of the Judgment/ Final Order be uploaded in the Tribunal’s Website.

¶40

Order signed and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 3^rd day of July, 2025.

¶41

(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson

¶42

Dated 3^rd July, 2025

¶43

3 /tp

Ganeriwal Gautam v. Bandla Ganesh Babu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganeriwal Gautam v. Bandla Ganesh Babu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indrani Chatterjee versus State Bank of India

Anjali Udyog versus Indian Overseas Bank

Deeksha Education Society versus State Bank of India

Mahishamardini Griha Nirman Pvt. Ltd. versus Indian Overseas Bank

State Bank of India versus Ms Kamyab Television Pvt. Ltd. And Others

L Rajasekhar Reddy versus Icici Home Finance Company Ltd.