Best Limitation & Condonation of Delay (DRT/DRAT) Lawyer

The consequences of missing a deadline in the Debt Recovery Tribunal or Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal can be significant. A borrower may have every reason to object to possession, sale, recovery proceedings or a DRT order. But if the challenge itself is late-filed, and the delay cannot be legally justified, those objections may never get a merits hearing.

For that reason, it is helpful to assess the issue of limitation and condonation of delay early ideally before preparing the substantive challenge itself.

Consider a typical situation. A borrower gets a possession notice. Or learns of an auction. Or receives a DRT order belatedly. Or changes lawyers. Or waits for the bank to provide documents. Or spends time trying to work out another proceeding. By the time the borrower finds a lawyer, the first question is no longer whether the bank did something legally wrong. Instead, it may be whether too much time has already passed to challenge the bank’s actions.

The answer turns on which proceeding you are considering.

For instance, an application under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“ SARFAESI Act”) usually known as a securitisation application or “SA”  must generally be filed before the DRT within 45 days from the relevant action under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. The Supreme Court has stated that this timeline furthers the SARFAESI Act’s purpose of quick enforcement of security interests. The Court has said that “limitation” here “cannot be dispensed with merely on payment of costs”.

Appeals under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (or “RDDBFI Act”) are treated differently. As per Section 20 of the RDDBFI Act, an appeal to the DRAT must be filed within 30 days from when the DRT order is received, and the statute clearly allows the Appellate Tribunal to accept an appeal that was filed late, so long as sufficient cause is shown.

By the same token, the Supreme Court has ruled that the DRAT can also condone delay in filing a SARFAESI appeal under Section 18.

The tricky situation is delay in filing a Section 17 SARFAESI application before the DRT. The High Courts have not agreed on what to do in every situation, and there is some nuanced case law exploring how Section 17 interacts with the Limitation Act and the overall statutory scheme. One decision from the Madhya Pradesh High Court , for instance, allowed Section 5 of the Limitation Act to apply to a delayed Section 17 application. In other decisions, the Courts have applied the 45-day deadline more strictly.

If you are a borrower, guarantor, secured creditor, auction buyer or other person affected by recovery proceedings, the take away point is simple. Do not bank on delay being condoned.

BK Singh Advocate and DRT Advocates can help assess the relevant limitation period, trigger date, nature of the challenged action, forum and facts surrounding the delay before your matter is filed.

Why Limitation in DRT and DRAT Matters Is Critical in 2026

Limitation is not a technicality. It can determine whether a tribunal even reviews the merits of your case.

Under Bank recovery laws, various steps can occur. These can include the classification of the account as an NPA followed by a demand notice issued under Section 13(2). Next could come objections raised under Section 13(3A), measures under Section 13(4), initiation of proceedings under Section 14 before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate, physical possession, valuation, auction notice and subsequent sale.

Each of these events can attract different legal consequences.

One borrower may become aware of a demand notice and mistakenly believe that a Section 17 application must be immediately filed against it. Another borrower may wait until they have lost physical possession despite an earlier actionable mechanism having already taken place. Someone else may file an application against one measure and then encounter another SARFAESI action proceeding creating an independent or additional cause of action against them.

Each of these scenarios is different because the clock for limitation purposes starts at different times.

Under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, an application to the DRT must be made within 45 days from the date on which the measure was taken. Courts take this deadline seriously due to the nature of the statute – it was intended to allow relatively quick enforcement and recovery.

The Supreme Court has reiterated this same discipline must be applied by Tribunals in SARFAESI proceedings, including how long securitisation applications themselves should be decided.

Reasonable excuses for delay are possible. Sometimes borrowers do not receive the order in time. Family emergencies, hospitalisation, death in the family, bad legal advice, parallel proceedings before another court, challenges in receiving documents, changes to a company’s management or genuine confusion about which action actually triggered the 45 day period can all play a role in delaying the filing of an application.

However sympathetic these reasons may sound, they do not automatically guarantee relief.

Each Tribunal will look at the chronology of events. They can ask when did the applicant actually know about the action taken; what steps were taken after receiving such knowledge; why did each significant period of delay go unexplained; was another forum litigated in good faith; and do the actions of the party demonstrate diligence?

Once again, this is why having an early legal review of your matter can help. BK Singh Advocate views Limitation in three parts: first determine what is the correct statutory remedy; second, determine when the limitation period starts; third, count the days correctly to determine whether filing was timely; and finally, if the application is late – determine whether there are legal arguments to condone delay or the period can be excluded from computation.

Quick Facts

Documents and Evidence Checklist for Limitation and Condonation

Timeline Documents to gather before filing a DRT/DRAT matter (with delay)

BK Singh Advocate will prepare a date wise limitation chart with these documents and thereafter proceed to prepare the main matter.

When Should You Consult a DRT/DRAT Lawyer?

Contact Us immediately if any of the below mentioned conditions exist with you –

• you have received notice of possession;
• physical possession is at risk;
• order under Section 14 is issued;
• notice of auction is issued ;
• property is brought to sale;
• you have received DRT order and want to challenge it;
• your Limitation period is over/expiring i.e. more than 30 days is left after you have received a DRT order;
• more than 45 days is left from date of any SARFAESI action;
• case related to same matter was earlier lodged in some other court or forum;
• your previous lawyer did not file a case even after you have asked him to;
• you tried to negotiate with bank for OTS when the action was underway ;
• you come to know about possession/auction at the eleventh hour;
• bank is disputing your computation of Limitation ;
• application for condonation of delay has been rejected earlier

DRAT has already issued a preliminary objection on ground of maintainability.

Act fast and get in touch with us rather than waiting for the bank to take another action if Limitation period is already running.

How DRT Advocates Can Help

DRT Advocates can handle matters related to banking recovery, SARFAESI, DRT and DRAT spread across India depending on jurisdiction and suitability to facts of the case.

Proceedings concerning limitation may be started with filing of a date wise review of the case instead of the merits.

BK Singh Advocate can review the notices, orders, possession record, auction order & details, certified-copy/details, previous proceedings and correspondences to ascertain the correct trigger date for limitation.

If the filing is delayed but admissible in law, the case may be filed with a separate application alleging sufficient cause.

If exclusion of time is applicable, it can be pleaded distinctly.

If it is unclear as to what the law stands from a statutory standpoint, relevant Supreme Court and High Court law of the concerned jurisdiction can be researched before advising the client on the chances.

There is no guarantee of trying to get condonation of delay.

The plan is to truthfully tell the client his real position legally and prevent any avoidable procedural mishaps.

Frequently Asked Questions

Yes, this information is helpful so far. Please continue.

Final Thoughts