DRAT Failed to Exercise Appellate Authority by Remanding 20-Year Case to DRT Under Recovery of Debts Act

The HC determined that DRAT erred in remanding the matter to DRT for fresh consideration of jurisdiction and debt status under Section 2(g) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. The DRAT failed to fulfill its appellate authority role by not addressing substantive legal issues raised before it, despite having sufficient factual material to decide HDFC's claims against Ashima and BBK. The court emphasized that remand orders should not be issued lightly, particularly in cases pending for nearly 20 years. The HC directed DRAT to decide the appeals on merits without further remand to DRT, noting that remand is only justified when re-trial is necessary or evidence is insufficient for disposition. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X