Delhi High Court recently considered whether the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) has jurisdiction to condone a delay, under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, in the filing of an appeal under section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). In Poonam Garg v The Chief Manager, State Bank Of Patiala & Anr, Garg filed an application under section 17 of the SARFAESI Act before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Chandigarh, which was dismissed in default. Garg’s application for recall of the DRT order was also dismissed due to non-appearance. Another application filed for restoration was dismissed on the ground that Garg had not indicated sufficient cause for non-appearance.
By Wang Weibin and Qiu Dongmei, AllBright Law Offices
By China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission
By Beijing Arbitration Commission/Beijing International Arbitration Centre (BAC/BIAC)
By Karthik Somasundram and Shreya Gupta, Bharucha & Partners
By Yogesh Chande and Preeti Kapany, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co