Pre-deposit cannot be demanded before deciding delay condonation under SARFAESI appeal procedures.

At the stage of deciding an application for condonation of delay under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, the Appellate Tribunal's inquiry is confined to whether sufficient cause exists for filing the appeal out of time; it cannot insist on pre-deposit of 50% of the debt as a condition for examining limitation. The statutory deposit requirement applies only when the appeal is entertained on merits, which occurs after delay is first condoned. A pre-deposit condition therefore cannot be imposed merely to decide the delay issue, and the direction to deposit before considering condonation was set aside, with the matter remanded to the Tribunal on delay alone.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in an appeal concerning refusal to condone delay under Section 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, the Appellate Tribunal could insist on deposit of 50% of the debt amount as a pre-condition for considering the delay question.

Analysis: The relevant statutory inquiry at the stage of a delay application is confined to whether sufficient cause exists for not filing within time. The requirement of deposit under Section 18 operates when the appeal is entertained on merits, which is a stage reached only after delay is condoned. Until the delay application is allowed, the substantive appeal is not taken up for hearing, and the pre-deposit condition cannot be fastened upon the applicant for deciding limitation alone.

Conclusion: The direction to deposit 50% of the amount as a condition for considering the delay application was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded, the impugned deposit direction was set aside, and the matter was sent back to the Appellate Tribunal for decision on the delay issue.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory pre-deposit condition applicable to the entertainment of an appeal does not govern an application seeking condonation of delay, because the appeal itself is not yet at the stage of being entertained until delay is first condoned.

---