Mr.Ghishulal Kothari v. Punjab National Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
The DRAT dismissed an appeal challenging the DRT's rejection of an application to condone a 220-day delay in filing a written statement. Relying on the Delhi High Court in Anita Garg, the court held that the limit cannot exceed 45 days.
What did the court decide?
The application for condonation of delay and the subsequent appeal are dismissed. Parties bear their own costs.
What the court decided
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAL
Dated the 27th Day of July, 2026
PRESENT: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G. Chandrasekharan CHAIRPERSON
IA 304/2025 (Delay) IN AIR 54/ 2025
(Arising out of I.A.No. 29 of 2024 in T A.No. 38 of 2022 on the file of DRT-I, Channai)
Between
- Ghishulal Kothari
- No 10 Sylvan Lodge Colony, 1 Cross Road Kilpauk Chennai-600010
- Shantilal Kothari
No 10 Sylvan Lodge Colony, 1st Cross Road, Kilpauk Chennas- 600 010.
- Sardarmal Kothari
- No 10 Sylvan Lodge Colony, 1 Cross Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal can condone a delay of 220 days in filing an application to file a written statement, given the statutory limit of 45 days.
Whether an appeal lies against the order rejecting an application for condoning delay in filing a written statement before the DRT.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Ghishulal Kothari and Ors.
- respondent
Punjab National Bank
Coram
G. Chandrasekharan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · July
- CNR
- 331090000542025
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court