Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
HDFC BANK vs THE REGISTRAR DRT IIII CHENNAI on 3 November 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
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 DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI
A.IR:2029/2026
HDFC Bank Ltd V/S The Registrar, DRT-3, Chennai & 5 ors 03/11/2026
Learned Counsel for Appellant Bank is present.
AIR 2029 of 2026 is filed against the return made by R1 to R3 in OA Dy No. 12983 of 2022 and direct R1 to R3 to place the Original Application before the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chennai.
It is the submission of the Learned Counsel for Appellant Bank that the Original Application has been filed for recovery of the debt due against the Defendants. DRT-III, Chennai Registry has made a series of piece-meal returns of the Original Application. When there was a delay in representation, applications have been filed for condonation of delay. Ultimately, DRT-III, Chennai Registry directed the Appellant Bank to file a consolidated delay application for condoning the delay of 497 days in representing the Original Application. That cannot be done for the reason that the delay in each occasion was for a different reason. Despite the direction to place the matter before the Registrar Court, DRT-III, Chennai for declination, it was not placed so far. Explanation of the Appellant Bank was not placed and considered.
This Tribunal, on going through the records, finds that there is an endorsement to place the Original Application before the Registrar, DRT-III, Chennai for declination. Therefore, this is not an appealable order before DRAT, Chennai. This Tribunal also finds from the perusal of records that piece-meal returns have been made while scrutinizing the Original Application. It is a settled proposition of law that if the plaint, application or petition has some defects, the return must be a comprehensive and consolidated return. Piece-meal returns of the plaint, application or petition is deprecated by the Hon’ble High Courts.
Though this appeal is not maintainable, this Tribunal, considering the issue involved, called for the remarks from R1 to R3 and perused. The reasons stated in the remarks for the returns are not acceptable. Respondents 1 to 3 are directed not to indulge in piece-meal return of applications in future.
In the said circumstances, this Tribunal sets aside the proceedings of the Learned Registrar, DRT-III, Chennai dated 25.5.2026 and direct the Registry, DRT-III, Chennai to number the Original Application, if all the returns are complied and the Original Application is in order. If the returns are not complied and the Original Application is not filed in accordance with law, it may be placed before the Learned Registrar, DRT-III, Chennai for appropriate orders, including declining the registration of the Original Application.
Appeal AIR 2029 of 2026 is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
Chairperson