Supreme Today AI
SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Securing Compensation for Procedural Delays in DRT Proceedings via Article 226 Writ Petitions

Compensation for Procedural Delays in DRT Cases: Can You Seek Relief via Writ?

In the fast-paced world of debt recovery, procedural delays in Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) proceedings can cause significant financial hardship and frustration for parties involved. Borrowers, guarantors, and even banks often find themselves entangled in prolonged litigation, raising a critical question: Any Reference Writ of DRT where Compensation is Paid over the Procedural Delay? This blog post delves into the legal framework, key principles, case laws, and practical recommendations to address this issue. Note: This is general information based on judicial precedents and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.

Understanding Procedural Delays in DRT Proceedings

DRT, established under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (RDB Act), aims for expeditious recovery of debts. However, delays due to procedural complexities, condonation applications, or interlocutory orders are common. Sources highlight that Because of the delay, unscrupulous parties to the proceedings take undue advantage and person who is in wrongful possession draws delight in delay in disposal of the cases by taking undue advantage of procedural complications. 2023 0 Supreme(Gau) 79

Such delays can prejudice parties, prompting questions about judicial intervention. While statutes like Section 22(1) of the RDB Act apply procedural parameters from the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, courts have invoked constitutional remedies for palpable injustice. 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 16206

Gade Sreenivas Reddy VS State Bank of India - Current Civil Cases

Judicial Review under Article 226: Gateway to Relief

The High Courts' power under Article 226 of the Constitution is plenary, allowing writ petitions even without exhausting statutory remedies in exceptional cases. This includes:

The Supreme Court recognizes exceptions to the exhaustion of remedies doctrine when:- Proceedings are ultra vires.- There is a violation of natural justice.- The proceedings are an abuse of process of law. 2007 0 Supreme(Guj) 330 2007 0 Supreme(Guj) 329

In DRT contexts, procedural delays causing significant prejudice may warrant intervention. Although direct statutory compensation for delays is absent, courts may grant relief if injustice is demonstrated. For instance, the DRT has the power to condone delay in filing Review Applications, and delays caused by procedural reasons are recognized as non-intentional, warranting condonation and compensation. 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 126

Key Case Law Insights on DRT Delays and Compensation

High Court Judicature at Bombay v. Shashikant S. Patil

This landmark case affirms High Courts' discretion to interfere if authorities violate natural justice or statutory regulations. Principles extend to DRT delays causing harm. 2004 0 Supreme(Cal) 142 2007 0 Supreme(Gau) 131

Lalit Popli v. Canara Bank

The Supreme Court clarified that High Courts are not appellate forums but can intervene against arbitrary conclusions or natural justice violations. 2007 0 Supreme(Gau) 131

Additional Precedents on Delay Condonation

  • In a notable DRAT matter, a two-day delay was deemed procedural and not intentional, leading to disposal with liberty to refile and court fee refund—indicative of relief for procedural lapses. 2025 Supreme(Online)(DRAT) 533
  • Statutes do not always condone delays in DRT appeals, yet petitioners have navigated limitations, as seen where auction sales proceeded despite delays. 2023 0 Supreme(Pat) 896
  • Writ petitions have addressed bank delays in approaching DRT, terming them illegitimate and awarding costs as compensation.

    BANK OF BARODA REPRESENTED BY ITS PR OFFICER AND POWER ATTORNEY HOLDER MR ASHOK KUMAR VERMA vs MUKESH KUMAR SINHA - Jharkhand

These cases underscore that while explicit compensation references are rare, judicial discretion supports remedies like costs or directions for expedited hearings.

When Can Compensation Be Sought for DRT Delays?

Compensation isn't automatic but may arise if delays result in tangible losses, such as prolonged asset encumbrance or opportunity costs. Courts emphasize substantive justice over procedural technicalities:

In one writ, compensation demands arose from payment delays despite court directions, highlighting frustration from inordinate procedural hold-ups. 2011 0 Supreme(MP) 1121

However, no blanket rule exists; claims succeed on case-specific facts, often via costs rather than quantified damages.

Practical Recommendations for Affected Parties

If facing DRT delays:1. File a Writ Petition under Article 226: Highlight natural justice violations or irregularities. 2007 0 Supreme(Guj) 330 2007 0 Supreme(Guj) 3292. Document Everything: Chronology of delays, communications, and prejudice (e.g., interest accruals, business losses). 2023 0 Supreme(Pat) 8963. Seek Condonation Where Applicable: Leverage DRT's power for review/appeal delays. 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 126 2025 Supreme(Online)(DRAT) 5334. Claim Costs/Compensation: Argue for judicial costs as proxy for delay harm, as in cases awarding Rs.10,000 each.

BANK OF BARODA REPRESENTED BY ITS PR OFFICER AND POWER ATTORNEY HOLDER MR ASHOK KUMAR VERMA vs MUKESH KUMAR SINHA - Jharkhand

5. Avoid Exhaustion Traps: Invoke exceptions for direct High Court approach.

Pro Tip: Engage counsel experienced in RDB Act and constitutional writs early to build a robust record.

Challenges and Limitations

Conclusion and Key Takeaways

Procedural delays in DRT cases, while common, need not be fatal. Through writs under Article 226, parties may secure intervention, condonation, and even compensation-like relief when delays cause injustice. Precedents like those in 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 126 and 2025 Supreme(Online)(DRAT) 533 affirm courts' role in balancing procedure with justice, preventing exploitation of delays. 2023 0 Supreme(Gau) 79

Key Takeaways:- High Courts can intervene via writs for natural justice breaches. 2007 0 Supreme(Guj) 330 2007 0 Supreme(Guj) 329- Document delays meticulously for stronger claims.- Compensation often manifests as costs or directions, not direct damages.- Prioritize substantive rights over procedural hurdles.

For tailored guidance, consult a legal expert. Stay informed on evolving DRT jurisprudence to protect your interests.

References: 2007 0 Supreme(Guj) 330 2007 0 Supreme(Guj) 329 2004 0 Supreme(Cal) 142 2007 0 Supreme(Gau) 131 2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 126 2025 Supreme(Online)(DRAT) 533 2023 0 Supreme(Gau) 79 2023 0 Supreme(Pat) 896

#DRTCompensation, #ProceduralDelay, #WritPetitionDRT
Chat Download
Chat Print
Chat R ALL
Landmark
Strategy
Argument
Risk
Chat Voice Bottom Icon
Chat Sent Bottom Icon

Related Judgments

Jupiter Electricals and Lamps India Pvt. Ltd. VS Union Of India - 2023 Supreme(Pat) 896

2023 0 Supreme(Pat) 896

Even the Statute does not provide for condonation of delay in filing appeal before the DRT. In order to overcome limitation issue, petitioner has misled the DRT in Appeal No. 11 of 2009, as is evident from Paragraph No. 4 of the Appeal relating to limitation. ... , Patna passed an order confirming the auction sale and respondent no. 4 paid the entire sale consideration. ... In fact, there is delay of ....

MSTC Limited, A Government of India Enterprise under the Administrative Control of Ministry of Steel, New Delhi, Incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 VS Standard Chartered Bank, A body incorporated under thereafter Provisions of the Royal Charter, 1853 With its principal office at 1, Aldermanbury Square - 2023 Supreme(Bom) 126

2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 126

This Court had allowed the said Writ Petition filed by the Petitioner and it was held that DRT had power to condone the delay in filing Review Application. ... Feeling aggrieved by the rejection of the delay condonation application, Petitioner had filed Writ Petition No. 2765 of 2018 in this Court. By order dated 3 May 2019 the said Writ Petition was allowed and this court held that #HL_....

borrower vs bank - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 26477

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 26477

as advance or what was the balance sale consideration to be paid and that in any case, there was no reference to any private treaty between the bank and the auction purchaser for extending the time limit. ... In the sale deed, the payments made by auction purchaser are detailed and the same is extracted below for ease of reference. The balance sum of Rs.52,000/- was paid in cash on 26.09.2006. ... The other submission by t....

Gade Sreenivas Reddy vs The State Bank of India - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 16206

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 16206

Section 22 (1) provides for the procedural parameters of the DRT and the DRAT with reference to The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 . Section 22 (1) is set out below. “a href=".. ... As stated above, the subject matter of the appeal was procedural and interlocutory since the appeal filed by the petitioner was against the refusal of the DRT to condone the delay for setting aside the ex part....

Gade Sreenivas Reddy VS State Bank of India

Current Civil Cases

Section 22(1) provides for the procedural parameters of the DRT and the DRAT with reference to The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Section 22(1) is set out below. ... As stated above, the subject matter of the appeal was procedural and interlocutory since the appeal filed by the petitioner was against the refusal of the DRT to condone the delay for setting aside the ex parte order passed ....

HDFC Bank Ltd. vs MAA KALIKA TILES - 2025 Supreme(Online)(DRAT) 533

2025 Supreme(Online)(DRAT) 533

Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay of two days in filing the Appeal against an order dated 4th April, 2025. Appeal is filed on 6th May, 2025. It is submitted that the delay is not intentional. Rather, it is procedural. ... No. 472 of 2025 in an Application under Rule 5(1) of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Refund of Court Fee) Rules, 2013 wherein a prayer is made by the Appellant for refund of the Court paid#HL_END....

Shree Sai Rolling Mills (India) Ltd. , rep. by its Authorized Director- Mr. Sandeep Kumar Bhagat VS North Eastern Development Finance Corporation Ltd. (NEDFI) - 2023 Supreme(Gau) 79

2023 0 Supreme(Gau) 79

Because of the delay, unscrupulous parties to the proceedings take undue advantage and person who is in wrongful possession draws delight in delay in disposal of the cases by taking undue advantage of procedural complications. ... Because of the delay, unscrupulous parties to the proceedings take undue advantage and a person who is in wrongful possession draws delight in delay in disposal of the cases by ....

BANK OF BARODA REPRESENTED BY ITS PR OFFICER AND POWER ATTORNEY HOLDER MR ASHOK KUMAR VERMA vs MUKESH KUMAR SINHA

Jharkhand

The delay on the part of the Bank to approach the DRT is illegitimate as the bank gained unfair finality and any reference to that case in arriving at a conclusion may not 4. ... to them as cost/compensation amount within 2 months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. ... of Rs.10,000/- each was not considered as liable to be paid span style="font-family:Tahoma,Bold,sans-serif

Himangshu Mallick VS State of West Bengal - 2023 Supreme(Cal) 865

2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 865

The writ petitioners, being successors-in-interest of the original claimant have come up with a case that they were already reeling under frustration for the delay in payment of compensation as the land acquisition proceeding started in 1971 culminated into disposal of their valuation reference being ... By the impugned order, learned single judge negated the claim of the writ petitioners on the ground of....

Classic Chemicals Limited vs Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal At Kolkata - 2025 Supreme(Telangana) 1359

2025 0 Supreme(Telangana) 1359

This Writ Petition is filed by State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Management Branch, Hyderabad to issue a Writ in the nature of Writ of Certiorari and to call for the records of the order dated 10.01.2025 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Kolkata in Appeal No.56 of 2022 against ... The applicant/respondent No.3 failed to comply the conditional order and consequent thereon, condone delay petition in ....

Laichhingi VS North East Frontier Railway - 2022 Supreme(Gau) 388

2022 0 Supreme(Gau) 388

7. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Collector, Siaha District, Siaha (respondent No. 7), to calculate the interest payable to the petitioners in terms of section 34 of the L.A. As already noticed, the petitioners admittedly were not given compensation prior to taking over of their land for construction of their land. It further held that it is for the purpose of affording relief to the person, who is entitled to such compensation that interest be....

LALIT KUMAR VS GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI - 2018 Supreme(Del) 310

2018 0 Supreme(Del) 310

The relevant portion of the possession report reads as under:- “….out of total area 311-19, Tafagat area 3-19 is reduced, out of the remaining area of 308 bigha, 275-08 has been found vacant at the site and boundary wall has been found in Khasra no.52/7 Min (2-0), 8(4-6), 12/(1-12), 13(4-16), 14(4-16), 15 (4-16), 16 (4-16), 17 (4-16), Kothas and houses have been found in Khasra No.53/51 Min (0-4) 15 Min (0-10). Similarly, the possession report dated 24th January, 1995, which has not only been ....

Sanjay Arora VS Unitech Ltd.

Consumer

That clause has not been challenged before this Commission. It is provided in the complaint that in case of delay, compensation would be paid to the complainant. As a matter of fact, the recovery proceedings initiated by ICICI bank/OP 2 are pending against the complainant. Reference has been made to clause 4 (c) (ii) of the allotment letter.

Amish Jain VS ICICI Bank Ltd. - 2012 Supreme(Mad) 3839

2012 0 Supreme(Mad) 3839

It is thus argued that since in the present case, the Authorized Officer of the respondent Bank has issued notice to the petitioners from within the jurisdiction of Delhi, the DRT having jurisdiction over Delhi would definitely have jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. It is contended that since the event which triggers the appeal under Section 17(1), is the action of the Authorized Officer of the Bank / Financial Institution, the DRT within whose jurisdiction the said Authorized Officer is s....

Ansuiya Paraste VS State of M. P. - 2011 Supreme(MP) 1121

2011 0 Supreme(MP) 1121

1. By this petition under Article of the Constitution of India, a prayer is made to issue a direction to the respondents to make payment of arrears of salary to the petitioner with effect from 22.12.2003 to 17.10.2004 as also the difference in pension, arrears of pension and other retiral dues with interest. A compensation is also demanded for the inordinate delay of making payment of aforesaid claims despite the direction of this Court in Writ Appeal No. 723/2006.

SupremeToday Portrait Ad

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

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

App_Store_Badge Google_Play_Store

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

WhatsApp Telegram Instagram Icon X YouTube Facebook LinkedIn

Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

whatsapp-icon