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) 13331

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BASANT BALAJI, J
DR.RAJU MATHEW – Appellant
Versus
FEDERAL BANK LTD – Respondent
OP (DRT) NO. 48 OF 2026 | OA NO.138 OF 2018



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.P.USHAKUMARI
For the Respondents: SMT.LATHA ANAND, SRI.K.R.PRAMOTH KUMAR, SRI.S.VISHNU (ARIKKATTIL)

Court mandates hearing of applications for setting aside ex parte order and condoning delay in proceedings.

Headnote:The petitioners filed a petition under OP (DRT) for re-opening of their case by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, which had set them ex parte in the original application for the recovery of dues. The court found their applications substantive to be heard and directed the Tribunal to consider them. The petitioners sought to set aside the ex parte order and condone delay. The final verdict ordered the Debts Recovery Tribunal to dispose of the applications after hearing both sides within a month.

Table of Content
1. overview of original application and petitioner's status. (Para 1)
2. request by petitioners for tribunal to consider their applications. (Para 2)
3. court directive for tribunal to take appropriate actions. (Para 3)

BASANT BALAJI J ======================

OP (DRT) No. 48 of 2026 ========================

Dated 20th day of February 2026 JUDGMENT The 1st respondent has filed O.A. No.138 of 2018 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, in which the petitioners are arrayed as defendants 1 and 2. The said O.A. has been instituted for realisation of an amount of Rs.7,20,10,230.37/- together with future interest. The petitioners were set ex parte in the said proceedings and ex parte evidence was recorded. On coming to know that they had been set ex parte, and after ex parte evidence had been recorded and the matter was taken up for orders, the petitioners filed Exts.P5 to P9 applications before the Tribunal, which have been numbered as I.A. No.1253 of 2026 (Ext.P5), I.A. No.1254 of 2026 (Ext.P6), I.A. No.1256 of 2026 (Ext.P7), I.A. No.1255 of 2026 (Ext.P8)

and I.A. No.1257 of 2026 (Ext.P9), respectively.

2. The limited request of the petitioners is that the above interlocutory applications be considered and disposed of by the Tribunal before passing final orders in the said S.A.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the respondents, and taking note of the fact that the aforesaid I.As. have been filed to reopen the hearing, to set aside the ex parte order, to set aside the order dismissing the petition to accept the written statement, and to condone the delay of 2 years, 10 months and 11 days in filing the application to set aside the ex parte order, I direct the Debts Recovery Tribunal to take up all the said I.As. and dispose of the same, after affording an opportunity of hearing to both sides, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

The original petition is disposed of as above.

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