agreement and demand promissory note for {50 lakhs on 03.02.2018 in favour of the respondent/defendant bank. It is also revealed that she received demand notice under S.l3(2) of the Act on 05.11.2020. Her husband, late Vijaya Kumar was reportedly expired on26.04.2021 only. Therefore, her contention to the effect that initially the facts were not within her the knowledge and when the bank officials called her over phone only she could know about the loan transactions is only utter false submitted before this Tribunal to obtain a favourable order in her favour. One cannot submit a false affidavit before ajudicial forum. Knowingly or unknowingly if that has been done, the consequence would be risky. Ignorance of law is not an excuse. Therefore, the contention that she being a house wife is not aware of the legal proceedings also cannot be accepted in the eye of law. The grounds urged by the petitioner/applicant in the application to condone the delay look very abnormal and ambiguous. No valid case put forward by the petitioner/applicant before this Tribunal to entertain the prayer of condonation of delay. Also, the IA was filed under S.5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. It may be noted that by virtue of S.24 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (as amended from time to time) - for short 'the RDB Act' - the provisions of the Limitation Acq 1963 are, as far as may be, made applicable to an application made to a Tribunal. The word 'application' as per S.2(b) of the RDB Act takes in an application made to a Tribunal under S.l9 of the RDB Act only. Therefore, it may be noted that the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 are not applicable to an application filed under S.l7(l) of the Act. Moreover, vide order dated 12.07 .2023 in Miscellaneous Application IR No.101 1/2019 in Securitisation Application IR No.3708/2018 this Tribunal categorically held that the Debts Recovery Tribunal has no power to condone the delay in filing application under S.17 (1) of the Act, which has become absolute and final. Therefore, looking at any angle, the delay cannot be condoned by this Tribunal.
