DRAT Chennai Dismisses Condonation Plea for 2417-Day Delay in Recovery Appeal — M. Padma Sree vs State Bank of India
Background and Context
The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Chennai, recently dealt with a significant application involving a staggering delay of 2417 days in filing an appeal against a recovery order. The case — M. Padma Sree Vs State Bank of India — arose from proceedings before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II (DRT-II), Chennai, in OA No. 333/2015, where an order had been passed on 18.09.2017 by the Presiding Officer.
The central question before the DRAT was whether such an extraordinarily prolonged and inadequately explained delay could be condoned to allow the appellant to contest the recovery proceedings on merits. The Tribunal's answer was an unequivocal no.
The Original Recovery Proceedings
The respondent banks had initiated OA No. 333/2015 before DRT-II, Chennai, seeking recovery of ₹1,15,39,31,669.57 from Defendants 1 to 6. Several defendants — specifically Defendants 7 to 9, 11, 10, and 12 — chose to contest the proceedings, while the remaining defendants remained absent and uncontesting.
After examining the pleadings, documentary records, and oral submissions advanced by counsel for the contesting parties, the Presiding Officer of DRT-II:
- Allowed the original application against Defendants 1 to 6, directing recovery of the claimed amount
- Dismissed the application against Defendants 7 to 18
The appellant in the DRAT proceedings was the 5th Defendant in OA No. 333/2015. Aggrieved by the order passed against her, she filed an appeal before DRAT Chennai — but only in 2024, nearly seven years after the original order was passed. This necessitated the filing of IA No. 499/2024, seeking condonation of the delay of 2417 days.
Contentions Raised by the Appellant
The appellant, through her counsel, advanced the following arguments in support of her condonation plea: