IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 5TH JULY 2011 / 14TH ASHADHA 1933 OP (DRT).No. 165 of 2011(O) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER -------------------- K.RAMESH,AGED 54 YEARS,S/O.DAMAYANTHI, "ROHINI",OORUPOIKA.P.O,EDACKODE VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU TALUK,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM(DT.). BY ADV. SRI.P.V.GEORGE(PUTHIYIDAM) RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- STATE BANK OF INDIA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER,STRESSED ASSETS RESOLUTION CENTRE,L.H.O.ANNEX(WING-1), IST FLOOR,CHILD WELFARE COMPLEX,LMS COMPOUND, PALAYAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA, SC THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss OP(DRT) NO.165/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE S.A. FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE ts S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- O.P.(DRT) No.165 OF 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner’s grievance in this writ petition is that the appeal filed by the petitioner under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act has been returned by the Debt Recovery Tribunal with an endorsement that the appeal is barred by limitation. According to the petitioner, that is not the way in which the registry of the Debt Recovery Tribunal should deal with the matter. The question as to whether the appeal is barred by limitation is to be decided by the Presiding Officer and not by the registry, is the contention. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank also. I am also of opinion that the registry could not have simply returned the appeal stating that the appeal is barred by limitation. The registry should have placed the matter before the Presiding Officer of the Debt Recovery Tribunal, O.P.(DRT)No.165/11 2 who is the person competent to pass orders regarding limitation. Therefore, the registry is directed to accept the appeal on resubmission and place the same before the Presiding Officer for appropriate orders, who shall decide the question, after hearing the petitioner and the bank. The appeal shall be re-presented before the registry of the Debt Recovery Tribunal within one week. The O.P.(DRT) is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd O.P.(DRT)No.165/11 3