Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals

Lt Shri Manohar Wadhumal Mulchandani vs VASTU HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED on 23 September 2026

1Exh-5MA 50 of 2026**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT AHMEDABAD****Present: Pankaj Kumar Upadhyay, Presiding Officer****MISC. APPLICATION No.50 of 2026 (Delay)****IN****CHAMBER APPEAL No.\_\_\_\_ of 2026****IN****NDN No.508 & 509 of 2026****Date of Order: 23/09/2026****Dipak M. Borsadwala & Anr.****..... Applicants****Versus****PNB Housing Finance Ltd.****..... Respondent****Present: Ms. Nimisha B. Kayastha, Ld. Counsel for the Applicants****ORDER**

1. 1. The Applicants have filed the present Misc. Application for Condonation of Delay of 268 days in filing Chamber Appeal to seek restoration of NDN No.509/2025 and NDN No.508/2025, which were declined to be registered by Registry vide order dated 18.11.2025 on account of non-payment of deficit Court Fees of Rs.750/- by the Applicants.

2. 2. The Applicants have stated that the advocate engaged by them in the present matter did not inform them about deficit Court Fees payable for registration of their case before this Tribunal. Therefore, they could not pay the deficit Court Fees in time. Hence, their case was declined to be registered.

2MA 50 of 2026

1. 3. The Applicants have further stated that they are ready to pay the deficit Court Fees Rs.750/- and requested to set aside order dated 18.11.2025 passed by the Registry and to restore their case.

2. 4. The Applicants have averred that they are villagers and ignorant about legal proceedings and hence could not approach this Tribunal for filing Chamber Appeal in time.

3. 5. In this context, it would be worthwhile to reproduce the provisions of Rule 5 of Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993, which read as under:

**"5. Presentation and scrutiny of applications. –**

*(1) The Registrar, or, as the case may be, the officer authorized by him, shall endorse on every application the date on which it is presented or deemed to have been presented under rule 4 and shall sign endorsement.*

*(2) If on scrutiny, the application is found to be in order, it shall be duly registered and given a serial number.*

*(2A) After registration of the application under sub-rule (2), the Tribunal shall issue summons to the defendants in Form IV.*

Page 1 of 2

*(3) If the application, on scrutiny, is found to be defective and the defect noticed is formal in nature, the Registrar may allow the party to rectify the same in his presence and if the said defect is not formal in nature, the Registrar, may allow the applicant such time to rectify the defect as he may deem fit.*

*(4) If the concerned applicant fails to rectify the defect within the time allowed in sub rule (3), the Registrar may by order and for reasons to be recorded in writing, decline to register the application.*

*(5) An appeal against the order of the Registrar under sub-rule (4) shall be made within 15 days of the making of such order to the Presiding Officer concerned in chamber whose decision thereon shall be final."*

1. 6. As per aforesaid Rule 5(5) of the DRT Procedure Rules, the Applicants ought to have preferred Chamber Appeal within 15 days before this Tribunal against the impugned order dated 18.11.2025. However, the Applicants have failed to do so and 3MA 50 of 2026

they have filed the present Application for condonation of delay of 268 days before this Tribunal on 18.11.2025.

1. 7. It appears from perusal of pleadings that due to ignorance of Applicants about legal proceedings, some time could have been consumed in taking legal action. It has been held by **Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in LPA No.224/2020 in the case of Manglesh Champaklal Gandhi** that this Tribunal has discretion to condone delay as provisions of Section 5 of Limitation Act and such discretion has to be exercised taking into consideration the facts and circumstances on the aspect of sufficient cause to condone the delay. The reasons as explained by Applicants in the Application for Condonation of Delay appear to be sufficient in the facts and circumstances of the above case and thus, the Application for Condonation of Delay deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice. However, while condoning the delay, this Tribunal thinks it fit to impose cost of Rs.1,000/- on the Applicants.

2. 8. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the present Application for Condonation of Delay is allowed. Delay of 268 days in filing Chamber Appeal is hereby condoned.

3. 9. The Applicants are directed to deposit cost of Rs.1,000/- with the **The Gujarat DRT Advocates Association, Ahmedabad** within a period of three days from today.

4MA 50 of 2026

1. 10. Registry is hereby directed to register and number the Chamber Appeal, upon presentation of receipt showing payment of cost, and let the Chamber Appeal be fixed for hearing on 08.10.2026.

2. 11. The present Misc. Application being M.A.No.50/2026 is accordingly disposed of.

**(PANKAJ KUMAR UPADHYAY)** **PRESIDING OFFICER** **DRT-II, AHMEDABAD** **23.09.2026**

Saloni

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead