The DRT allowed an application for condonation of a 237-day delay in re-presenting an Original Application for money recovery, relying on a Madras High Court precedent, with conditions to pay costs and file a compliance report.
Condonation of delay of 237 days in re-presenting Original Application allowed, subject to payment of costs 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 24th day of April 2026
Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer
M.A. No.83 of 2026 in OA Dy. No.5407 of 2023
State Bank of India, O.M.R.Branch, Represented by its manager, New No.4/952 & 4/952 A, 3rd floor, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Perungudi, Chennai-600 096 ....Applicant
-Vs-
Mr.K. Gunasekar S/o Mr.Kaliyamoorthy No.593, 15th cross street, Durgai Avenue, 1st Main Road, Selavayal, Chennai- 600051 …Defendants
Counsels on record / appeared:
Counsel for Applicant : M/s. A.K.K.Jayakamal Rayudu
ORDER IN MA No. 83/2026
applicant bank for condonation of delay of 237 days in re-presenting the OA.
Uploaded on 24.04.2026 at 17:20 hours
2
administrative transition including shifting of office premises, during which bundles were misplaced. 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 237 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 24.04.2026 at 17:20 hours
3
to comply with the conditional order above, MA stand dismissed
automatically without there being any need to pass separate order.
(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI
(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 24th day of April, 2026)
Uploaded on 24.04.2026 at 17:20 hours
3 issues framed by the court
Whether condonation of delay is required in a cheque bounce or recovery matter when OA is re-presented due to administrative transition and misconduct.
Whether the applicant bank's explanation for the delay is sufficient to warrant condonation.
What are the conditions for allowing the tardily represented Original Application?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
V.P. Rajula -Vs.- K.J. Sakadeva RajaRelied on¶20
V.P. Rajula -Vs.- K.J. Sakadeva Raja reported in LAWS (MAD)- 2020-8-441
State Bank of India, O.M.R.Branch
Mr.K. Gunasekar
SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA
Parties & counsel
