The DRT allowed restoration of an Original Application filed by Union Bank of India, condoning delay attributed to bank merger and document transfer. The order imposes conditions including payment of costs and waives interest for the delay period.
MAs allowed; OA restored subject to payment of costs and waiver of interest for the delayed period.
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.
MAs 39/25, 44/25 & 45/25 in OA No.02/2022
19.02.2025
1
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI
Dated this the 19th day of February, 2025
Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer
Misc. Application Nos. 39/25, 44/25 & 45/25 in OA No.02 OF 2022
Union Bank of India Rep. by its Manager Porur Branch Plot No.289, Mount Poonamallee Road Sakthi Nagar, Porur, Chennai – 600 116
….Petitioner / Applicant
-Vs-
Chennai – 600 016
Chennai – 600 016
S/o G. Arumugam No.41, South Usman Road T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017 ….Respondents/Defendants
Counsels on record / appeared:
Counsel for Applicant : Mr. T. Narayanasamy
: -ORDER ON MA NOs. 39/25, 44/25 & 45/25-:
197 days in filing restoration petition, condone delay of 47 days in re-presentation of
MAs 39/25, 44/25 & 45/25 in OA No.02/2022
2
19.02.2025
restoration petition and MA No.45/25 is filed to restore TA, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 28.11.2022.
MAs 39/25, 44/25 & 45/25 in OA No.02/2022
3
19.02.2025
Heard and perused the records of the case .
MAs 39/25, 44/25 & 45/25 in OA No.02/2022
19.02.2025
4
Sd/(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI
(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 19th day of February, 2025)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether delay in filing restoration petitions due to merger and documentation transfer can be condoned for a financial institution.
Whether the Original Application dismissed for default can be restored to enable adducing evidence.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
V.P. Rajula Vs. K.J. Sakadeva RajaRelied on¶6
V.P. Rajula Vs. K.J. Sakadeva Raja reported in LAWS (MAD)-2020-8-441
Union Bank of India
V. Veeravel
V. Vijaya
A. Srinivasan
S.V. Gowramma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
S.V. Gowramma
Parties & counsel
