Partly allowed

Ganesan K v. The Authorized officer, Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd.

DRAT8 Oct 2025MISC APPEAL/59/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal disposed of the appeal against dismissal of an extension application for the second instalment. It directed the Presiding Officer to expeditiously dispose of the pending special appeal and granted a one-month stay on possession.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed of directing the Presiding Officer to dispose of SA 244/2023 on merits expeditiously; one-month stay on possession granted.

Ganesan K versus The Authorized officer, Omkara Assets… — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

¶2

Dated the 08^th of October, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: Hon’ble Mr. Justice G. Chandrasekharan CHAIRPERSON

¶4

M.A. [S.A] No.59/2025

¶5

(IA 2228/2023 in SA 244/2023 on the file of DRT, Madurai)

¶6

Between

¶7

K. Ganesan (M/53), S/o. Krishnan, Plot No. 54, 55 Salom Cottage, KVR Nagar 2nd Street, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Iyyer Bunglow, Madurai - 625007.

¶8

… Appellant

¶9

And The Authorized officer, Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd, No.9, M.P. Nagar, First Street, Kongu Nagar Extn, Tirupur - 641607. … Respondent Counsel for Appellant : Mr. V. Kishore Kumar Counsel for Respondent : Mr. V. Kasirajan

¶10

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This Appeal is filed against the interim order passed in IA 2228/2023, seeking extension of time for paying the second instalment as per the conditional order passed by Learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Madurai in IA 1189/2023 in SA 244/2023. It appears that the conditional order directing the Appellant to make certain payments was passed in IA 1189/2023, especially, when the second part of the condition could not be complied with by Appellant in time. Therefore, an Application was filed seeking extension of time for compliance of second part of the conditional order. Learned Presiding Officer finding that there is no valid reason given, dismissed IA 2228/2023 and thus this Appeal is filed.

¶13

SA 244/2023 is filed to set aside the order passed by Learned CJM, Madurai in Cr.M.P.No.1090/2022 on 12.08.2022. This SA is still pending. In the said circumstances, this Tribunal is of the view that this Appeal can be disposed of by giving direction to Learned Presiding

¶14

¶15

Officer, DRT, Madurai to dispose of the SA 244/2023 as expeditiously as possible.

¶16

Accordingly, this Appeal is disposed of directing Learned Presiding Officer DRT, Madurai, to dispose of the SA 244/2023, on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. Both parties shall bear their own costs. All pending IAs, if any, stand closed.

¶17

Meanwhile, there shall be an order of stay against taking possession for a period of one month from today. Thereafter, it is left to the decision of Learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Madurai, to continue or discontinue the stay, depending upon the need and exigency.

¶18

[Dictated to Athistamani, PS, in open court, transcribed by her, corrected and signed by me this 08^th of October, 2025]

¶19

[ Justice G. Chandrasekharan] CHAIRPERSON

¶20

Ganesan K v. The Authorized officer, Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesan K v. The Authorized officer, Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Car Tree Accessories Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India

A Dhanendharan versus State Bank of India

Shaji Cc versus Irinjalakuda Town Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

R Ajeeshram and Anr. versus Ms Sundaram Home Finance Limited

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus S.Suresh Kumar

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus Mr.R.Suresh