top of page
Search

DRAT Condones Delay, Sets Aside DRT Order, and Remands Restoration Application for Fresh Consideration on Merits

DRAT condoned the delay, set aside the DRT order, and remanded the restoration application for fresh consideration on merits.


The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Kolkata Bench headed by Justice Anil Kumar Srivastava (Chairperson reviewed an appeal and held that the delay in filing the appeal was justified due to sufficient cause, including the COVID-19 pandemic and procedural irregularities corrected through compliance with notarization requirements, and that the DRT-I’s dismissal of the restoration application lacked reasoning and was a patent illegality, warranting the appeal’s remand for decision on merits.


The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) adjudicated an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning a significant delay of 1,579 days in filing an appeal against an order dated December 2, 2019, issued by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-I (DRT-I), Kolkata, in O.A. No. 540 of 2018 (arising out of T.A. No. 9 of 2002). The case stemmed from UCO Bank's efforts to restore its original application, which had been dismissed on June 17, 2013. While the DRAT initially allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the DRT-I in 2023, the Respondents challenged this decision before the Calcutta High Court, raising objections regarding procedural irregularities in the notarization of the supporting affidavit.


The High Court, in C.O. 3926 of 2023, identified defects in the notarization process, deeming the affidavit non est in law as the deponent was not properly identified before the notary. It set aside the DRAT's earlier order, granting UCO Bank the liberty to refile the application with appropriate procedural compliance. Subsequently, the bank filed a fresh appeal, supported by a duly notarized affidavit sworn by its Executive Vice President in Mumbai, and submitted it to the DRAT on April 30, 2024. Upon review, the DRAT held that the affidavit adhered to the Notaries Act, 1952, and the Notaries Rules, 1956, dismissing the Respondents' procedural objections.


The DRAT further examined the precedents cited by the Respondents, including V.R. Kamath v. Divisional Controller, and found them inapplicable due to factual distinctions. Relying on cases like Pathapati Subba Reddy v. Special Deputy Collector and Basawaraj v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, the DRAT reiterated the principles governing the condonation of delays, emphasizing sufficient cause, particularly in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Supreme Court's suo motu extensions. The Tribunal concluded that the delay was neither negligent nor lacking bona fides, meriting condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.


Additionally, the DRAT scrutinized the DRT-I’s December 2, 2019, order, noting that it lacked reasoning and committed a patent illegality by dismissing the restoration application on erroneous grounds. The High Court had earlier pointed out the flawed basis for rejecting the restoration application, noting that it was filed after the dismissal of the original application, contrary to the DRT’s findings. The DRAT ultimately set aside the impugned order, allowed the application for condonation of delay, and remanded the matter to the DRT-I with instructions to decide the restoration application on its merits without undue adjournments.


The DRAT directed the parties to appear before the DRT-I, Kolkata, on August 14, 2024 and emphasized the expeditious handling of the proceedings. The registry was instructed to communicate the order to the DRT within three days, ensuring timely compliance. This decision reinforces the principle that procedural irregularities should not obstruct substantive justice and underscores the importance of adherence to procedural laws in the judicial process.


Mr. Pratik Ghose, Mr. Avishek Roy Chowdhury, Advocates represented the Appellant.


Mr. Soumabho Ghosh, Mr. Tirthankar Das and Mr. Aayush Lakhotia, Advocates appeared for the Respondent.


 

Subscribers can access the Case, including Case Analysis, Ratio Decidendi, Headnotes, Briefs, Case Research, Cited Case Laws, Case Law Cross-references, and the latest updates on Statutes, Notifications, Circulars, Guidelines, Press Releases and more.

Click on the Citation/Link to access these resources

Comments


bottom of page