Tribunal power to condone delay under the Limitation Act applies in debt recovery proceedings unless excluded by special law.

Section 24 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 makes the Limitation Act applicable to Tribunal proceedings as far as may be, and Section 29(2) extends Sections 4 to 24 to special law proceedings unless expressly excluded. Applying the principle that exclusion of the Limitation Act may arise only by express words or necessary implication, the analysis concludes that the Debts Recovery Tribunal is not barred from considering delay under Section 5 in proceedings under Section 19. A delay application cannot be rejected merely on the assumption that the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction because the filing was beyond time.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Debts Recovery Tribunal has power to condone delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 in proceedings under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.

Analysis: Section 24 of the 1993 Act makes the Limitation Act applicable to applications before the Tribunal as far as may be. Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act applies Sections 4 to 24 to special law proceedings unless expressly excluded. The legal position that the Limitation Act is procedural and that exclusion of its provisions may also arise by necessary implication was applied. On that basis, the Tribunal could not reject the delay application on the assumption that it lacked jurisdiction merely because the application was filed beyond the prescribed period.

Conclusion: The Tribunal has power to condone delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 in proceedings under Section 19 of the 1993 Act, and the contrary view was held unsustainable.

---