Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
TAMMINENI CHANDRA SEKHAR SRINIVAS vs UNION BANK OF INDIA (ANDHRA BANK) on 31 July 2026
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.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON Appeal Diary No. 1258 of 2025 Order No. 08 31.07.2026 Tammineni Chandra Sekhar Srinivas ...Appellant -Vs- Union Bank of India …Respondent Mr. Nemani Srinivas, Learned Counsel for Appellant Mr. Dipanjan Datta with Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury and Ms. Esha Basak, Learned Counsel for Respondent THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL: I.A. 776 of 2025 Application, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Instant appeal is filed against order dated 23rd July, 2024 passed by Learned DRT, Visakhapatnam in M.A. 5 of 2024 arising out of O.A. 857 of 2015. Appeal is filed with 156 days delay. Learned Counsel for Appellant would submit that the delay was not intentional rather beyond the control of the Appellant. Learned Counsel for Respondent oppose the prayer. Having considered the submission, we are of the view that sufficient ground is made out to condone the delay although it is a very old matter wherein the Bank dues have
2 yet not been recovered. Accordingly, I.A. 776 of 2025 shall stand allowed subject to payment of Rs.10,000.00 (Rupees ten thousand) to be paid to the Bank within two weeks. I.A. 777 of 2025 Application, under Section 21 of the Recovery of Debts And Bankruptcy Act, 1993 praying for waiver from making pre deposit. Appeal is preferred against order dated 23rd July, 2024 wherein implementation for setting aside the ex parte judgment was dismissed by the Learned DRT by not condoning the delay in preferring the application for setting aside the ex parte order. Learned Counsel for Appellant would submit that the order is procedural in nature and no pre deposit is required. Hon’ble Telangana High Court in Gade Sreenivas Reddy -vs- State Bank of India (2025 SCC OnLine 687) held that the matters of orders, dismissing an application for recall of the ex parte order, is procedural type of order where pre deposit is not required. Accordingly, I.A. 777 of 2025 stands disposed of. Admit the appeal by providing regular appeal number. Opposition is already filed. Copy served. Rejoinder, if any, be filed within two weeks. List on 8th September, 2026 for hearing of appeal. (Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson Dated: 31st July, 2026 05/ac