Disposed

Hdfc Bank v. Maa Kalika Tiles and Ors.

DRAT18 Jul 2025REGULAR APPEAL/76/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRAT allowed the condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the matter was settled and the appellants sought liberty to withdraw the appeal and move the DRT afresh. The tribunal disposed of the appeal as withdrawn with liberty to move the DRT again.

What did the court decide?

I.A. No. 282 of 2025 allowed; Appeal disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to move DRT afresh.

Hdfc Bank versus Maa Kalika Tiles and Ors. — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2025)

¶1

Reportable/Non-Reportable

¶2

Appeal Dy. No.476 of 2025 -DRAT-Kolkata

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT

¶4

KOLKATA

¶5

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶6

CHAIRPERSON

¶7

Appeal Dy. No. 476 of 2025

¶8

(Arising out of I.A. No. 472 of 2025 in O.A. No. 256 of 2023 in DRT Cuttack)

¶9

HDFC Bank Ltd., represented through Mr. Rajat Kumar Bisoi, aged about 34 years, S/o – Ramesh Chandra Bisoi, working as Legal Manager and Authorized signatory. Registered office at HDFC Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai. Branch Office at HDFC Bank Ltd, Jhola Sahi Branch, At-Jhola Sahi, Puri Ghat, Cuttack – 753001.

¶10

.…Appellant

¶11

-Versus-

¶12

MAA KALIKA TILES represented through its Prop: Sudhansu Sekhar Sahoo. At- Plot No.1138, Jhinkijhiari, Tala Sahi, Tapanga, Near ME School, Dist.- Khurdha-752018.

¶13

SUDHANSU SEKHAR SAHOO, S/o Lingaraj Sahoo, At- Jhinkijhiari, Tala Sahi, Tapanga, Near Jhinkijhiari High School, Dist.-Khurdha752018.

¶14

LINGARAJ SAHOO, S/o Chakradhar Sahoo, At- Jhinkijhiari, Tala Sahi, Tapanga, Near Maa Kalika Stone Crusher, Dist.-Khurdha752018.

¶15

HIMANSHU BHUSAN SAHOO, S/o Chaturbhuta Sahoo, AtJhinkijhiari, Tapanga, Near Market, Dist.- Khurdha-752018.

¶16

BINODINI SAHOO, C/o- Chaturbhuja Sahoo, At- Jhinkijhiari, Tala Sahi, Tapanga, Near Jhinkijhiari High School, Dist.-Khurdha752018

¶17

….Respondents

¶18

Counsel for Appellants	Mr. Nalini Kanta	Dash,
	Learned Counsel
Counsel for Respondents	None
JUDGMENT	: 18^thJuly,	2025

¶19

¶20

Appeal Dy No. 476 of 2025-DRAT-Kolkata

¶21

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶22

The matter is taken up in the revised list. None is present for the Respondents. Learned Counsel for the Appellant is present. All the Respondents are duly served. 2. I.A. No. 282 of 2025 Application under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay of two days in filing the Appeal against an order dated 4^th April, 2025. Appeal is filed on 6^th May, 2025. It is submitted that the delay is not intentional. Rather, it is procedural. 3. Having considered the submissions made by the Learned Counsel, I found the ground to be sufficient. Accordingly, I.A. No. 282 of 2025 is allowed. Delay in filing the Appeal is condoned. 4. Let the Appeal be registered as regular Appeal by providing a regular Appeal number. 5. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellant and perused the record.

¶23

6. Instant Appeal has arisen against an order dated 04.04.2025 passed by Learned DRT Cuttack in I.A. No. 472 of 2025 in an Application under Rule 5(1) of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Refund of Court Fee) Rules, 2013 wherein a prayer is made by the Appellant for refund of the Court paid on the ground that the matter is settled between the parties. The DRT has already consigned the O.A. proceedings. Hence, the Court fees paid by the Appellant be refunded. Learned Counsel for the Appellant placed

¶24

¶25

Appeal Dy No. 476 of 2025-DRAT-Kolkata reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in WP. No. 5229 of 2022. 7. After hearing the Learned Counsel for the Appellant Learned submits that liberty may be granted to move the DRT afresh and the Appellant may be permitted to withdraw the Appeal. Accordingly, Appeal is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to the Appellant to move the DRT afresh in accordance with law. Learned DRT is expected to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law.

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Appeal is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to the Appellant to move the DRT afresh in accordance with law. Learned DRT is expected to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law.

¶28

No Order as to costs.

¶29

File be consigned to Record Room.

¶30

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

¶31

Order signed and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 18^th day of July, 2025.

¶32

(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson

¶33

Dated 18^th July, 2025

¶34

2 /tp

Hdfc Bank v. Maa Kalika Tiles and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank v. Maa Kalika Tiles and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Gayatri Devi Agarwal and Ors.

Union Bank Of India versus Ms Venkateshwara Textiles

Ms. S.R. Retail Zone Pvt. Ltd. And Others versus Union Bank of India

Canara Bank versus M/s Sree Vijayasri Lakshmi Traders

Raju Majumder versus Punjab National Bank

Ms Tbpr Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India