The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Chennai, considered an application for condonation of delay of 763 days in re-presenting an Original Application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of dues after the earlier OA was returned for corrections.
Application allowed; delay condoned subject to payment of Rs.5,000 to TN Legal Services Authority and filing compliance report.
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.
1
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI
Dated this the 14th day of August 2026
Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer
M.A. No.178 of 2026 in OA Dy.No.1361 of 2022
Canara Bank, Rep by its Branch Manager Muthialpet Branch, #45, NSC Bose Road, Pondicherry 605 001 ...Applicant -Vs-
#34, 1st cross street, Thirumal nagar,
Puducherry 605 001
Counsels on record / appeared:
Counsel for Applicant : M/s. K.Anbarasan
ORDER IN MA No.178/2026
applicant bank for condonation of delay of 763 days in re-presenting the OA.
recovery of sum of Rs.38,60,465.96p (Rupees Thirty Eight Lakhs Sixty
thousand Four hundred and Sixty Five and Ninety Six paise only) together
Uploaded on 14.08.2026 at 15.21 hours
2
with interest and costs. It is submitted that the OA was returned by the Registry for few corrections. The erstwhile counsel had taken back the bundle from the Registry but failed to handover to the concerned branch, subsequently he fell sick and could not trace the bundle. Hence OA could not be re-presented within the time granted by this Tribunal, which is neither wilful nor wanton, but only due to aforesaid reasons. Therefore, the applicant bank prayed for condonation of delay of 763 days in representing the OA.
Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank
and the records of the case.
V.P. Rajula -Vs.- K.J. Sakadeva Raja reported in LAWS (MAD)-
2020-8-441 feels it apt to condone the delay and give opportunity to applicant to prosecute their case.
Uploaded on 14.08.2026 at 15.21 hours
3
found to be in order. It is clarified that in case if the applicant bank fails to comply with the conditional order above, MA stand dismissed
automatically without there being any need to pass separate order.
Sd/-
(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI
(Dictated to Roshnee, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 14th day of August, 2026)
Uploaded on 14.08.2026 at 15.21 hours
2 issues framed by the court
Whether delay of 763 days in re-presenting the Original Application can be condoned.
Whether the reasons for delay amount to wilful or wanton conduct requiring strict disallowance.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
V.P. Rajula-Vs.- K.J. Sakadeva RajaRelied on¶26
V.P. Rajula-Vs.- K.J. Sakadeva Raja reported in LAWS (MAD)-2020-8-441
Canara Bank
M/s Parijatham Agencies
Mr. V. Soundarajan
S.V. Gowramma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
