The Debt Recovery Tribunal admitted an appeal filed in person by the appellant against a dismissal of an application alleging fraud and forgery. The single-judge Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal summarily at the admission stage, finding no interference required.
Appeal dismissed in limine at the admission stage.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON
Misc. Appeal Diary No. 31 of 2026 (Arising out of I.A. 2171 of 2025 in M.A. 122 of 2019 in S.A. 348 of 2017 in DRT-2, Hyderabad)
Order No. 03 11.02.2026 T.P. Surya Chandra Rao & Another … Appellants -VsPiramal Capital & Housing Finance Limited & 5 Others … Respondents
Mr. T.P.S. Rao Appellant in person (Virtual)
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL:
For Admission
Heard the Appellant appearing in person who is also appearing as Advocate in the matter and perused the record.
Instant appeal is preferred against order dated 8.12.2025 passed by Learned DRT-II at Hyderabad whereby an I.A. 2171 of 2025 is filed by the Appellant in M.A. 122 of 2019 in S.A. 348 of 2017 seeking direction for cancellation of the Mutation Proceedings by issuing a direction to the GHMC Authorities with consequential reliefs and with a further relief for propitiating the Respondents and also for compensation to the extent of Rs.2.00 crore.
Learned DRT dismissed the application holding that the Respondents No. 4 and 5 are public servants. M.A. 122 of 2019 was filed seeking appointment of Advocate Commissioner for taking over possession in implementation
2
of the DRT order dated 2.8.2019 while I.A. is moved for cancellation of the Mutation Proceedings on the ground of fraud having been committed which is beyond the jurisdiction of the DRT.
Learned Counsel for Appellant at the very outset would submit that some written notes were submitted by the Appellant which was not considered by the DRT. Further it is submitted that fraud and forgery was committed by the authorities which is to be looked into by the DRT.
Perusal of the I.A. filed by the Appellant reveals that all the allegations levelled against the GHMC Authorities and the Respondents No. 5, Divisional Engineer (Operations), TGSPDCL and Respondent No. 6, SHO, P.S. L.B. Nagar are regarding fraud and forgery committed by them and further for cancellation of the Mutation Proceedings which are in the name of Respondent No. 3, Ganji Mallesh.
Perusal of the I.A. itself reveals that this application is just moved to linger on the proceedings. If the Appellant has any grievance regarding commission of any crime Appellant can take appropriate action in accordance with law. Learned DRT has no jurisdiction to make any enquiry or investigate the allegation of fraud and forgery.
Further, DRT has also no jurisdiction to cancel the Mutation Proceedings and the Mutation made in favour of Respondent No. 3, Ganji Mallesh.
All the allegations levelled by the Appellant itself shows that the petition is not maintainable before the Learned DRT and the Learned DRT has rightly dismissed petition.
3
Copy of the Judgment/Final Order be uploaded in the Tribunal’s Website.
File be consigned to Record room.
Order dictated and pronounced in open Court.
(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson
Dated: 11th February, 2026
03/ac
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Debt Recovery Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain an application alleging fraud and forgery against public authority officials and to cancel mutation proceedings.
T.P. Surya Chandra Rao & Another
Piramal Capital & Housing Finance Limited & 5 Others
Anil Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
