JUDGMENT

1. Ext.P1 order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal Ernakulam in I.A. 2089/2006 in S.A. 77/2006 is under challenge. The prayer in the said I.A. is to condone the delay of 554 days in filing the Securitisation Application. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the Possession Notice dated 27.4.2005 issued under Rule 8(1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002 ( hereinafter referred to as the “Rules”) and notice prior to sale dated 24.5.2005 issued under Rule 8(5) of the Rules respectively The securitisation application was filed under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002( hereinafter referred to as the 'Act')

2. The question considered by the Debts Recovery Tribunal Ernakulam is as to whether I.A.No. 2089 of 2006 in S.A. No. 77 of 2006, filed for condonation of delay in filing the Securitisation Application is allowable or not. The Tribunal held that there is no merit in the I.A and further held that it has no jurisdiction or power to condone the delay and that Section 5 of the Limitation Act is not applicable . Consequently the Tribunal dismissed the said I.A.

3. The facts of the case