Mrs Nousheen Fatima and Ors. v. Hdfc Bank Ltd. and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
The DRT-II Bench dismissed an application seeking condonation of a 165-day delay in filing an appeal. The court held that no sufficient cause was established despite cited illnesses and financial constraints. Consequently, the appeal itself was dismissed as time barred.
What did the court decide?
Application for condonation of delay dismissed; appeal dismissed as time barred.
What the court decided
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON
Diary No. 63 of 2024
(Arising out of S.A. 171 of 2023 in DRT-II, Hyderabad)
Order No. 16 17.01.2025
Mrs. Nousheen Fatima & 3 Others … Appellants
-Vs-
HDFC Bank Limited 2 & Others
… Respondents
Mr. Manav Gecil Thomas (Virtual), Learned Counsel for Appellants
Ms. Mekhala Kanji (Virtual), Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1/ Bank
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether sufficient cause was shown to condone a delay of 165 days in filing an appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
Whether the每一份 affidavit attached was genuine or sufficiently explained the delay.
Whether the appeal is time barred and should be dismissed.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Mrs. Nousheen Fatima & 3 Others
- respondent
HDFC Bank Limited & Others
Coram
Anil Kumar Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · January
- CNR
- 191090000632024
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court