Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
M S PKF FINANCE LTD AND ORS vs UCO BANK AND ANR on 15 September 2026
**DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI**
**Appeal No. 223/2024**
**In**
**M.A. No. 90/2023**
**Arising out of SA No. 421/2017 (DRT-III, Chandigarh)**
**Item No. 11**
**M/s PKF Finance and others**
**V.**
**UCO Bank and another**
**15.09.2026 Hon'ble Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain**
**Present: Sh. Bikram Dwivedi, Advocate for appellant through VC**
This matter is taken up through Hybrid hearing.
**L.A. No. 796/2024 (application for condonation of delay)**
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The instant application is filed for seeking condonation of delay of 122 days in filing the present appeal. It is stated that the impugned order dated 07.02.2024 was communicated to the Counsel for the appellants on 05.07.2024 and thereafter an email dated 29.07.2024 was sent to the appellants by the Counsel and thereafter the appeal was preferred on 30.07.2024. It is stated that the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional but due to the reasons as stated in the application. After considering all facts, the delay of 122 days in filing the present appeal stands condoned. Application is allowed accordingly.
**Appeal No. 223/2024**
2. The appellants filed S.A. bearing No. 421/2017 titled as **M/s PKF Finance and others v. UCO Bank and another** which was ordered to be dismissed in default vide order dated 22.06.2023 passed by the DRT-III, Chandigarh. The order dated 22.06.2023 is reproduced as under:
**SA/421/2017**
**PKF FINANCE LTD Vs. UCO BANK**
**Present: Sh. Mohan Parsad, Advocate proxy for Sh. Animesh Sharma Advocate for Applicant**
Sh. Mohan Parsad, Advocate submitted that he has no instructions from the applicants or from his main counsel and appropriate orders may be passed. It appears from record that since 16.09.2019, none is coming on behalf of applicants in this SA. It appears that applicants have no interest to proceed with this SA. Hence, this SA is dismissed for default.
1. 3. The appellants filed Misc. Application bearing M.A. No. 90/2023 under Order 9 Rule 9 read with Section 151 CPC for restoration of S.A. bearing No. 421/2017. DRT-III, Chandigarh vide 07.02.2024 has dismissed the M.A. bearing No. 90/2023 by holding that none was present on behalf of the appellants/ applicants on various dates and, accordingly, the DRT-III, Chandigarh opined that the appellants/ applicants were not interested to proceed with the S.A.
2. 4. The Counsel for appellants stated that regular appearance was put before the DRT in the proceeding of S.A. bearing No. 421/2017 and also referred the various orders passed in the S.A.
3. 5. However, without going into controversy on merit, in the interest of justice, the impugned order dated 07.02.2024 is set aside and the S.A. bearing No. 421/2017 is restored to its original number subject to the cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited with the DRT Bar Association, Chandigarh A/c No. 11152010030160, PNB, Sector-8C, Chandigarh, IFSC Code: PUNB0111510 within two weeks from today and thereafter the receipt be produced before DRT-III, Chandigarh on the next date of hearing.
4. 6. The appellant is directed to appear before the DRT-III, Chandigarh on 15.12.2026 for further direction. It is made clear that despite this order, if the appellant preferred to remain absent on the date of hearing, in that eventuality, DRT-III, Chandigarh shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law.
5. 7. The copy of this order be sent to DRT-III, Chandigarh for information and compliance.
sd - ----- **(Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain)** **Chairperson**