Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a defendant in an original application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal can object to alleged defects in the application after registration, and whether the Tribunal can permit the applicant to cure such defects in the interests of natural justice.
Analysis: Section 22 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1995 empowers the Tribunal to regulate its own procedure on principles of natural justice, subject to the Act and the rules. The scrutiny rules for registration are intended to ensure proper processing of the application, but even if the application is assumed to contain defects, the defendant's grievance is only relevant where the defect prejudices the defence. In such a situation, the Tribunal is not powerless to permit correction of the defect, because justice between the parties requires that the applicant be given an opportunity to cure an irregularity that may otherwise hinder the defence. The alleged absence of translated copies of Telugu documents did not justify interference where the counter affidavit stated that translations would be furnished at trial.
Conclusion: The defendant could raise the objection, but the Tribunal was entitled to allow cure of the defect and no interference was called for.