THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1034 OF 2014 Dated:06-12-2014
Between:
SIDBI, represented by its General Manager, 101, Hermitage Office Complex, 1st Floor, Saifabad, Hyderabad – 500 004 ... PETITIONER AND A. Ram Mohan Rao and four others . RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No. 1034 OF 2014
ORDER:
The petitioner, a bank filed O.A No.372 of 2000 in the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) against the respondents for recovery of certain amount.
The O.A was allowed and thereupon, the petitioner filed R.P No.32 of 2006 for execution. At that stage, a claim petition being C.P No.
12 of 2008 was filed before the Recovery Officer. That was allowed through order dated 07-06-2010.
The petitioner intended to file an appeal against the order in the claim petition. Accordingly, it filed R.A.I.R No.3 of 2010 before the Tribunal. The same was returned with certain objections. The file was not re-presented immediately. Only after about three years that the file was re-presented by the petitioner. It filed I.A No. 4487 of 2013 with a prayer to condone the delay of 1159 days in re-presenting the review appeal. The Tribunal dismissed the I.A through order dated 12-02-2014. Hence, this revision.
Heard Sri K. Sai Rama Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioner. It is represented that on the notice sent to the respondents, endorsement “not claimed” was made. The notice is deemed to have been served.
The delay no doubt is enormous exceeding almost three years. However, it is only in the context of re-presentation. The petitioner has already approached the Tribunal by filing appeal within time. The condonation of delay is almost a matter between the Court and the party who prays for it. Further, the delay in representation cannot be assessed with the same yardstick as is done in case of the delay in presentation. This Court is of the view that the delay can be condoned by directing that in the event of the appeal being allowed, the petitioner shall not be entitled to claim interest for the period in question on the amount involved.
The C.R.P is therefore allowed and the order under revisions is set aside. I.A No. 4487 of 2013 is allowed by imposing condition that the petitioner shall not be entitled to claim interest on the amount due for the period during which the appeal is pending from its inception till disposal.
The miscellaneous petitions filed in this revision shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J 06-12-2014 ks