SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 10173

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Basant Balaji, J
K P Sayed Mohammed – Appellant
Versus
The Registrar Debts Recovery Tribunal -I – Respondent
OP (DRT) NO. 407 OF 2025 | AIR NO.1046 OF 2025 | IA 1721/2025 | SA NO.723 OF 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Smt. S. Mumtaz, Smt. Alisha Aslam, Smt. Amina Ruby Faizal, Smt. Bhavana Vijayakumar, Smt. Swaliha Selmi T.R.
For the Respondents: Smt. Jayasree K.P., Shri. John Joseph

Procedural fairness mandates timely consideration of waiver applications in debt recovery appeals.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to OP (DRT) No. 407 of 2025. The petitioner appeals against the order dated 15.05.2025 by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, seeking waiver of the pre-deposit requirement for appealing. The court found the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal's failure to consider the waiver application unjust, prompting orders for expeditious review by 10.02.2026. Judgment reveals critical procedural handling of appeals in debt recovery cases.

Table of Content
1. petitioner appeals for waiver of pre-deposit. (Para 1)
2. court considers the validity of appeals. (Para 2)
3. direction for timely review of waiver application. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

(Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2026)

The limited request of the petitioner is that the petitioner has filed an appeal before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal challenging the order dated 15.05.2025 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in I.A. No.1721/2025 in S.A. No.723/2024. Along with the appeal, an application has been filed seeking waiver of the condition of pre-deposit from 50% to 25%, as well as an application for stay. The grievance of the petitioner is that the DRAT has not considered the application for waiver, and therefore, a direction is sought to consider the same.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents.

3. Taking note of the fact that the application was filed on 26.05.2025 and the petitioner shall not be made any deposit of 25% of the debt amount till date, it cannot be said that the DRAT has not passed any orders because of the non deposition of the amount. However, the DRAT has not taken the waiver application into consideration.

Whatever that may be, since a limited request is only for disposal of Ext.P11 application for waiver, I dispose of this original petition directing the DRAT to take up Ext.P11 and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible, at any rate on or before 10.02.2026. Till such time, possession shall not be taken.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top