M. Padma Sree Vs State Bank of India (DRAT Chennai)
The application before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Chennai, sought condonation of a 2417-day delay in filing an appeal against the order dated 18.09.2017 passed by the Presiding Officer, DRT-II, Chennai in OA No. 333/2015.
The original application had been filed by the respondent banks for recovery of ₹1,15,39,31,669.57 from Defendants 1 to 6. While Defendants 7 to 12 contested the proceedings, the remaining defendants did not. The DRT allowed the original application against Defendants 1 to 6 and dismissed it against Defendants 7 to 18. Aggrieved by that order, the appellant, who was the fifth defendant, filed the appeal along with an application seeking condonation of the delay.
The appellant contended that she had not been served with notice in the original application and was therefore unaware of the proceedings. She submitted that the DRT had passed the order ex parte without hearing her and that she had not received a free copy of the order. According to her, she first became aware of the DRT order only through the company petition CP/IB/256/2022 pending before the NCLT, Chennai Bench, after which she obtained a certified copy and filed the appeal. She further asserted that the address mentioned in OA No. 333/2015 was incorrect, that she was neither a borrower nor a guarantor, that she had been wrongly impleaded with a fictitious address, and that the property involved was agricultural land.
