Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
YASHPAL GUPTA vs HDFC BANK on 5 November 2026
**DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI**
**Misc. Appeal No.336/2026
Arising out of SA No.98/2025 (DRT-II, Delhi)**
**Item No.5**
**Sh. Yashpal Gupta**
**V.**
**HDFC Bank Limited and others**
**05.11.2026 Hon'ble Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain**
**Present: Ms. Saloni Dwary, Advocate for the appellant through VC**
This miscellaneous appeal is taken up through Hybrid hearing.
**ORDER (ORAL)**
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.
1. In the present appeal the challenge is to the order dated 25.05.2026 passed by DRT-II, Delhi in S.A. bearing no.98/2025 titled as **Yashpal Gupta V. HDFC Bank Limited & others**. The order dated 25.05.2026 reflects that the counsel for the respondent no.1 had submitted before DRT that the reply to the S.A. was submitted through online mode but it was not available on record as observed by DRT. DRT-III, Delhi thereafter directed the respondent no.1 bank to re-file the reply before the next date of hearing i.e. 04.08.2026. The order dated 25.05.2026 is reproduced as under:- **Matter is taken through video conferencing /Hybrid Mode.**
2. The Ld. Counsel for the respondent bank has submitted that he has already filed the reply to the SA through online mode.
3. From perusal of the record, it is clear that the reply filed by the respondent bank is not available either on the file or online. Therefore, the Ld. Counsel for the respondent bank is directed to re-file the same, before the next date of hearing.
**Matter be listed on 04.08.2026 before the Registrar for completion of pleadings and evidence.**
2. The Registrar, DRT-II, Delhi vide order dated 04.08.2026 again directed the respondent no.1 bank to re-file the reply within a week positively with a copy to the appellant.
-2-
3. Ms. Saloni Dwary, Advocate for the appellant stated the respondent no.1 has not filed reply to the S.A. bearing no.98/2025 within the stipulated time and as such the right of the respondent no.1 to file reply should be ordered to be closed. It is further argued that DRT has given various opportunities to the respondent no.1 to file reply against express provision of law.
4. In view of the submission made by the counsel for the appellant, without giving any observation on the merit of the case, the appeal is disposed of with liberty to the appellant to file appropriate application within two weeks from today for closure of the right of the respondent no.1 to file reply and giving direction to DRT-II, Delhi to decide such application, if filed by the appellant, in accordance with law.
5. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
sl-
(Dr. Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain) Chairperson
-pk\$