SRI GAYATHRI KITCHENS vs INDIAN BANK on 23 October 2026

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

A.IR:586/2018

Gayathri Kitchens P Ltd. And Ors Vs Indian Bank And Ors 23/10/2026

IA 1341/2025 (Delay in representation) & IA 1342/2025 (Delay) :

Learned Counsel for both sides are present.

IA 1341 of 2025 is filed to condone the delay of 1910 days in representing AIR (SA) D.No. 586 of 2018.

AIR (SA) D.No. 586 of 2018 was filed against the order dated 18.7.2018 in SA No.101 of 2017 passed by the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-I, Chennai.

It is stated by the Petitioners in the affidavit filed in support of this application that the Petitioner’s deceased father in law, Mr. K. Nageswara Rao had inadvertently paid the fixed court fee of Rs.200/- in AIR (SA) D.No.586 of 2018 on the mistaken assumption that the court fee was only Rs.200/-, and when AIR (SA) D.No. 586 of 2018 was returned for deficient court fee, the Learned Counsel had asked the Petitioner’s deceased father in law to pay the balance court fee but the funds could not be arranged. It is also stated that this case was entrusted to another counsel for representation and when the above case came up for hearing with regard to deficient court fee, Mr. K. Nageswara Rao was severely ill and bedridden and could not be contacted by the said representing Counsel and the said case came to be dismissed for non-compliance of returns.

The Petitioner’s affidavit also mentions that the Petitioner’s were kept completely in the dark about these proceedings and they came to know about it only after the third-party purchasers came to claim their property. Subsequently, Petitioner’s father in law applied for perusal of the case bundle on 1.12.2023, and permission for perusal of the case records was accorded by DRAT, Chennai on 18.12.2023. Thereafter, the present Counsel for the Petitioners helped the Petitioners to comply with the returns and file the present appeal. This had resulted in the delay of 1910 days in representing AIR (SA) D.No. 586 of 2018.

IA 1342 of 2025 was filed to condone the delay of 44 days in filing AIR (SA) D.No. 586 of 2018. The supporting affidavit submitted by the Petitioners states that as such there is no delay in filing AIR (SA) D.No. 586 of 2018, as against the order dated 18.7.2018 in SA No. 101 of 2017, because RA No. 4 of 2018, filed for revision of the final order in SA No. 101 of 2017 was pending before the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-I, Chennai and was decided only on 16.10.2023, and the Petitioners filed this appeal on the same day.

The delay from the date of passing of order in SA No.101 of 2017, which is 18.7.2018, till the order in RA 4 of 2018, which is 16.10.2018, is purely technical in nature, and thus, seeks to condone the delay.

Learned Counsel for the Respondent Bank opposes these applications on the ground that the reasons stated are not acceptable.

Earlier, this Tribunal allowed IA 205 of 2024 filed for condoning the delay in filing the restoration petition and MA No. 17 of 2025, restoration petition. The delay in the representation of the appeal is huge to the extent of 1910 days and the delay in filing the appeal is 44 days.

Considering the reasons stated for allowing IA 205 of 2024, and with a view to give an opportunity to the Petitioners to prosecute this appeal on merits, this Tribunal is of the view that these applications can be allowed, subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- in each of the applications, i.e., Rs.5,000/- in IA 1341 of 2025 and Rs.5,000/- in IA 1342 of 2025, to the Library of DRT / DRAT Bar Association, Chennai on or before 13.11.2026.

Call on 16.11.2026.

Sd/-

Chairperson