The court reiterated that sufficient cause must be shown for condoning delay; mere knowledge of proceedings and failure to act does not merit relief.

JUDGMENT :

1st August, 2025

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL:

Instant Appeal has arisen against the order dt.8.8.2024 passed by the Ld. DRT Visakhapatnam in MA. No. 4 of 2024 in OA. No. 1028 of 2019 (M/s. Tropical Coatings International Private Limited and others versus Central Bank of India).

2. As per the pleadings of the parties, the OA.No.1028/2019 was filed by the Central Bank of India for issue of Recovery Certificate for Rs.13,31,67,724/- with pendent lite and future interest. Pending OA, parties arrived at a settlement under OTS. Appellants offer for Rs.6 crores dt.11.12.2019 was accepted by the bank vide letter dt.3.1.2020 and an amount of Rs.1.01 crores was deposited by the applicant and the balance amount of Rs.4.99 crores was required to be deposited by 31.3.2020 to close the account. Thereafter the joint memo dt.18.2.2020 was executed. For disposal of the OA in terms of settlement between the parties an IA.389 of 2019 was filed by the bank to pass a consent decree. The balance amount of Rs.4.99 crores could not be deposited by the appellants due to intervention of Enforcement Directorate. Time was extended till November 2020 to make the deposit. In the last week of August 2023, demand notice dt.17.8.2023 was served upon the appellants which was issued by Recovery Officer in RP.No.226 of 2023 pursuant to the judgement passed by the DRT, Visakhapatnam. A Recovery Certificate for an amount of Rs.13,81,69,823/- with pendente lite and future interest @14.35% compounded monthly rests was issued.

3. Thereafter MA.4/2024 was filed by the appellant for recalling the order dt.28.3.2022 passed in OA.1028/2019 with an application to condone the delay of 521 days on the ground that no notice in IA.389/2020 was served upon the appellants. The appellants came to know about it after issuance of demand notice dt.17.8.2023 and the impugned judgment was passed behind the back of the appellant.

4. MA.4/2024 was dismissed by the Ld. DRT, Visakhapatnam on 8.8.2024 refusing to condone the delay of 521 days. Writ Petition No.17872 of 2024 was filed by the appellants before the Hon’ble High Court, which was disposed of on 19.8.2024 with an observation to approach the Hon’ble DRAT. 5. It is submitted that MA.16/2022 was filed by the bank on 25.5.2022 for amendment in the order which was allowed without notice to the appellants. Principles of natural justice was not followed by the DRT.

6. Ld. DRT dismissed the MA.4/2024 on the ground that the order passed on 28.2.2022 was not exparte order rather, it was consent decree hence the reasons or grounds for condonation of delay are not acceptable and that the delay is not properly explained, consequently MA.4/2024 was dismissed.

7. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned order, appellant preferred the Appeal.

8. I have heard the Ld.Counsel for the Appellant - Mr. A.B.Satyanarayana, Senior Advocate and the Ld. Counsel for the respondent - Mr.Shiv Mangal Singh.

9. As far as the facts of the matter are concerned, an OA.No.1028/2019 was filed by the respondent bank for issue of Certificate for Rs.13,31,67,724/-. Pending the OA, One Time Settlement proposal was approved by the bank on 3.1.2020 for an amount of Rs.6 crores where the upfront amount of Rs.1.01 crore was deposited. Remaining Rs.4.99 crore was to be deposited on or before 31.3.2020. In case of default in payment, sanction would automatically be cancelled. Further, it was agreed that if the compromise amount is not paid within stipulated period, entire concessions shall stand withdrawn and it shall be treated as if there was no compromise settlement in the account and in that case suit shall be proceeded further. It so appears that a joint memo was prepared and filed by the bank as well as defendants - 1) M/s. Tropical Coatings Inter