Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.32 seconds)Baleshwar Dayal Jaiswal vs Bank Of India & Ors on 5 August, 2015
6.Therefore, following the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in 2015
(4) CTC 809 [Baleshwar Dayal Jaiswal Vs. Bank of India & others], we
http://www.judis.nic.inare of the considered view that the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal has
got powers to condone the delay in filing the appeal. In view of the same,
5
the order passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal is liable to be set
aside. Accordingly, the same is set aside. The matter is remitted back to
the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal for fresh consideration. The Debt
Recovery Appellate Tribunal is directed to decide the application in
I.A.No.882 of 2013 in AIR.(SA).No.680 of 2013 on merits and in accordance
with law, after giving due opportunity of hearing to all the parties as
expeditiously as possible.
Bolani Ores Ltd. Etc vs State Of Orissa Etc on 24 September, 1974
Principle of legislation by incorporation is well known and has
been applied inter alia in Ram Kirpal Bhagat vs. The State
of Bihar, 1969 (3) SCC 471; Bolani Ores Ltd. v. State of
Orissa, 1974 (2) SCC 529; and Onkarlal Nandlal v. State of
Rajasthan, 1985 (4) SCC 404, relied upon on behalf of the
Appellants. We have thus no hesitation in holding that the
Appellate Tribunal under the SARFAESI Act has the power to
condone the delay in filing an Appeal before it by virtue of
Section 18(2) SARFAESI Act and Proviso to Section 20(3) of the
RDB Act.”
From the above judgment, it is clear that the Debt Recovery Appellate
Tribunal has got power to condone the delay in filing the Appeal. However,
in the case on hand, the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, following the
judgment of a Division Bench of this Court, erroneously declined to
entertain the application for condonation of delay.
Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 5 in The Limitation Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Onkarlal Nandlal vs State Of Rajasthan & Anr on 23 September, 1985
Principle of legislation by incorporation is well known and has
been applied inter alia in Ram Kirpal Bhagat vs. The State
of Bihar, 1969 (3) SCC 471; Bolani Ores Ltd. v. State of
Orissa, 1974 (2) SCC 529; and Onkarlal Nandlal v. State of
Rajasthan, 1985 (4) SCC 404, relied upon on behalf of the
Appellants. We have thus no hesitation in holding that the
Appellate Tribunal under the SARFAESI Act has the power to
condone the delay in filing an Appeal before it by virtue of
Section 18(2) SARFAESI Act and Proviso to Section 20(3) of the
RDB Act.”
From the above judgment, it is clear that the Debt Recovery Appellate
Tribunal has got power to condone the delay in filing the Appeal. However,
in the case on hand, the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, following the
judgment of a Division Bench of this Court, erroneously declined to
entertain the application for condonation of delay.
Ram Kirpal Bhagat & Ors vs State Of Bihar on 13 November, 1969
Principle of legislation by incorporation is well known and has
been applied inter alia in Ram Kirpal Bhagat vs. The State
of Bihar, 1969 (3) SCC 471; Bolani Ores Ltd. v. State of
Orissa, 1974 (2) SCC 529; and Onkarlal Nandlal v. State of
Rajasthan, 1985 (4) SCC 404, relied upon on behalf of the
Appellants. We have thus no hesitation in holding that the
Appellate Tribunal under the SARFAESI Act has the power to
condone the delay in filing an Appeal before it by virtue of
Section 18(2) SARFAESI Act and Proviso to Section 20(3) of the
RDB Act.”
From the above judgment, it is clear that the Debt Recovery Appellate
Tribunal has got power to condone the delay in filing the Appeal. However,
in the case on hand, the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, following the
judgment of a Division Bench of this Court, erroneously declined to
entertain the application for condonation of delay.
1