KEDARNATH RAUSALYA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The principal relief claimed in this petition is to direct the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad to consider the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal on its own merits, in accordance with law.

(2.) Earlier, this Court took the view that the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal has no power to condone the delay in filing of appeal before it under Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. That view has now been reversed by the Supreme Court.

(3.) The Supreme Court has remitted the matter back to this Court for reconsideration. Admittedly, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal at the threshold on the ground that it had no power to condone the delay in filing of appeal. The Tribunal has not considered the explanation offered by the petitioner. If the Tribunal while taking the view that it had no power to condone the delay, it has also analyzed the cause set up by the petitioner, we would have proceeded with the hearing of the matter in respect of opinion of the Tribunal. Whether sufficient cause has been made out in condoning the delay, should be the satisfaction of the Tribunal in the first place and this Court may be loath to substitute that satisfaction unless it is found to be manifestly wrong and not in accordance with the settled legal principles.