Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
IDBI BANK vs Suhel Saeedulla Khan on 17 January 2025
**Before Arun Kumar Singal, Presiding Officer DRT-III, Navi Mumbai Miscellaneous Application No.3 of 2024**
Presented on : 12.12.2023
Registered on : 10.01.2024
Decided on : 17.01.2025
**IDBI Bank Limited**
A body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies Act (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act of 1970, having its registered office at IDBI Tower, World Trade Centre Complex, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005
And also having office at
Plot No.A-34, Marigold House, Cross Road No.2, Marol MIDC, Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 093.
...APPLICANT
V/s.
**1. Mr. Suhel Saeedulla Khan,**
Flat No.203, 2<sup>nd</sup> floor, 'A' wing, Block No.40, Shree Gopinath Krupa CHS Ltd., Manish Nagar, Four Bungalows, J.P. Road, Andheri (West), Mumbai 400 053
And having address at
Flat No.12, Blg. No.2, Plot No.13, Orchids Bhavani Nagar, Andheri East, Mumbai 400 059.
**2. Mr. Ashfaquilla Khan,**
Flat No.203, 2<sup>nd</sup> floor, 'A' wing, Block No.40, Shree Gopinath Krupa CHS Ltd., Manish
Nagar, Four Bungalows, J.P. Road, Andheri (West), Mumbai 400 053
And having address at
Flat No.12, Blg. No.2, Plot No.13, Orchids Bhavani Nagar, Andheri East, Mumbai 400 059.
...RESPONDENTS
AND
**Mrs. Rajeshwari Raj Medithi,**
Age 60 years, an adult, Indian Inhabitant of Mumbai residing at Flat No.A-203, 2<sup>nd</sup> floor, Shree Gopinath Krupa CHS Ltd., Building No.40, Manish Nagar, Four Bungalows, J.P. Road, Andheri (West), Mumbai 400 053.
...APPLICANT (INTERVENER)
**Argued By -**
Advocate Ms. M.R. Patel for the Applicant Bank.
Advocate Mr. Vivek Phadke for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Advocate Ms. Reena Rolland for the Intervener.
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.
**ORDER**
1. 1. This Order of mine shall dispose of the Miscellaneous Application bearing No.3 of 2024 for delay condonation filed by the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
2. 2. As per Applicant, in the month of March 2022, original Applicant Bank i.e. IDBI Bank Limited pasted a Notice on the door of the secured asset whereby it was stated that Recovery Proceeding No.386 of 2017 in Original
Application No.219 of 2012 was pending before the DRT-II Mumbai. Thereafter, the Applicant obtained certified copy of the record and proceedings of the O.A. No.219 of 2012 from DRT-III Mumbai as well as Recovery Proceeding No.386 of 2017 from DRT-II Mumbai on 06.05.2022 and thereafter the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) immediately filed an intervention application in the said Recovery Proceeding to obtain a stay in the Recovery Proceeding which was dismissed.
3. The Applicant-Intervener has alleged that she suffered a major heart problem and was admitted in the hospital and was in critical condition. The doctor of the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) had advised the family of the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) that she must not be given any kind of stress or shock as it may prove to be fatal to her and may even cause her death. The advocate of the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) was in touch with the daughter of the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) named Ms. Arti Medithi, as the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) was hospitalized and suffering from heart problems. The family of the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) therefore did not inform her that the intervention application was dismissed as she was not supposed to be given any kind of stressful or shocking news. In these premises, the Applicant has sought condonation of delay of 531 days.
4. After hearing the parties, this Tribunal finds it to be cooked up story of the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) since as per her own version the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) came to know in March 2022 regarding the Recovery Proceeding issued in O.A. No.219 of 2012 and also she came to know regarding pendency of Recovery Proceeding and she filed intervention application which was dismissed on 17.08.2022. Not only that, the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) has also filed Summary Civil Suit No.1464 of 2024 in Bombay City Civil Court at Borivali Division at Dindoshi, Goregaon, Mumbai. Even she filed Writ petition (L) No.39050 of 2024. Even the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) has filed Appeal before the Hon'ble DRAT, Mumbai on 16.01.2023 and withdrew the same on 30.08.2023. Had the Applicant (Intervener/Third Party) been hospitalized and was serious heart patient and if no shocking news was to be given to her, then how she was pursuing these remedies before different forums i.e. City Civil Court, Recovery Officer, Hon'ble High Court and DRAT, Mumbai and before this Tribunal. Even the medical record of hospitalisation during the period 19.04.2022 till filing of this
Application has not been brought on record. So, on the excuse of medical emergency of the Applicant, delay cannot be condoned. The cause put forth by the Applicant in the opinion of this Tribunal is not sufficient to condone the delay. So, this delay condonation application bearing Miscellaneous Application No.3 of 2024 is hereby dismissed.
(ARUN KUMAR SINGAL) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-III, MUMBAI
Typed By:- S S Shrivastava PS