This applicant regarding a delayed review application before a DRT in Jaipur where the mortgaged property had already been sold and the right of redemption expired, resulting in the dismissal of the applicant.
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.
Court of the Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
Item No. 58
Case No.MA/150/2025 IN SA/687/2024
ANIL KUMAR Vs BAID FINSERV LIMITED
Date: 27.10.2025.
Proceedings through hybrid mode Present:
Shri Kuldeep Pareek, Counsel for the Applicant
Shri Sandeep Bansiwal, Counsel for the Respondent Bank/FI
The matter is taken up on the orders being passed in Appeal no. 122/2025 whereas the applicant was directed to approach the Tribunal with the review application vide order dated 15.07.2025. There is a delay of 42 days in filing the review application as stated by the counsel for the applicant.
Sh. Pramod Kumar had appeared for the applicant on 14.02.2025 and the orders was passed in his presence, but no affidavit has been filed by Advocate Sh. Pramod Kumar confirming the averments made in this review application.
Counsel for the respondent bank submits that the applicant was present in Court when these orders were passed in his presence was not recorded. The review application could have been dismissed on the ground of delay and leaches. The property was already sold on 28.07.2025 and there is nothing for this Tribunal to interfere with the said sale as the right of redemption under Section 13(8) has already gone. The borrower is not before the Tribunal, the applicant is third party who purchased the mortgaged property.
Counsel for the respondent bank submits that they have issued two letters dated 01.03.2025 and 29.03.2025 indicating therein requiring payment of Rs. 22.00 Lac as per the orders. Though both the letters have been acknowleded and no objection has been raised. The appliant is third party and he can recover this amount from the seller of the property.
In view of the above, nothing survives in this Misc. Application, therefore, this Misc. Application stands dismissed.
File be consigned to record, as per rules. Copy of order be uploaded on website.
Court of the Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the review application filed with a delay of 42 days admits to be entertained.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anil Kumar
Baid Finserv Limited
Vimal Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
