Which cases can be filed in DRT Debts Recovery Tribunal?

Which cases can be filed in DRT Debts Recovery Tribunal?

Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) deals with cases related to recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions. The following types of cases can be filed in DRT:

1. Recovery of debt under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.
2. Cases related to default in loan repayment by companies and individuals.
3. Claims related to security interest by banks and financial institutions.
4. Recovery of debts under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002.
5. Cases related to guarantees given for loan repayment.
6. Claims related to mortgage and hypothecation of assets.
7. Cases related to disputes between banks and borrowers over the terms of loan agreements.
8. Claims related to security receipts issued by securitization companies.

The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002

The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002 is an Indian law that provides for the securitisation of financial assets of banks and financial institutions and for the reconstruction of such assets. The act aims to provide a legal framework for the securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and for the enforcement of security interest created in respect of such assets.

The act enables banks and financial institutions to take over the assets given as collateral for loans in case of default and recover their debts through sale of such assets. The act provides a simplified and time-bound process for the recovery of debts, thereby reducing the burden on the banking system and improving the flow of credit to productive sectors.

Important Section of The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002

The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002 is an important law in India for the securitisation of financial assets and enforcement of security interest created in respect of such assets. Some of the important sections of the act are:

1. Section 13: This section provides for the enforcement of security interest without the intervention of the court or tribunal.
2. Section 14: This section provides for the powers of the authorized officer to take possession of the securities and manage the same.
3. Section 17: This section provides for the sale of the securities by the authorized officer.
4. Section 18: This section provides for the powers of the authorized officer to take over the management of the borrower’s business.
5. Section 19: This section provides for the powers of the authorized officer to transfer the securities by way of lease, assignment or sale.
6. Section 21: This section provides for the powers of the authorized officer to dispose of the securities.
7. Section 22: This section provides for the rights of the borrower and the guarantor against the enforcement of security interest.
8. Section 24: This section provides for the penalties for making false statements and misusing the provisions of the act.

These sections provide the framework for the enforcement of security interest and the securitization of financial assets, and are an important tool for banks and financial institutions to recover their debts in a quicker and simpler manner.

The Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993

The Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (RDDBFI Act) is an Indian law that provides for the recovery of debts owed to banks and financial institutions in India. The act provides for the establishment of Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) to deal with the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions. The act provides a quicker and simpler procedure for the recovery of debts and helps in reducing the burden on the banking system.

Under the RDDBFI Act, a bank or financial institution can file a claim in the DRT for recovery of debt. The DRT hears the matter and passes an award in favor of the bank or financial institution if it finds that the debt is due and payable. The act also provides for an appeal against the award passed by the DRT to the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT). The act thus provides a quick and effective mechanism for the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions.

Important Section of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993

The Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (RDDBFI Act) is an Indian law that provides for the recovery of debts owed to banks and financial institutions in India. Some of the important sections of the act are:

1. Section 3: This section provides for the establishment of Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) to deal with the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions.
2. Section 17: This section provides for the powers of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) to enforce the award passed by it.
3. Section 18: This section provides for the right of appeal against the award passed by the DRT to the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT).
4. Section 19: This section provides for the powers of the DRAT to hear appeals against the awards passed by the DRT.
5. Section 25: This section provides for the recovery of debts by attachment and sale of assets of the borrower.
6. Section 28: This section provides for the penalties for making false statements and misusing the provisions of the act.

These sections provide the framework for the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions, and are an important tool for banks and financial institutions to recover their debts in a quicker and simpler manner.

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) is a comprehensive law aimed at consolidating and amending the laws relating to reorganization and insolvency resolution of corporate persons, individuals, and partnership firms in India. The code provides a time-bound process for the resolution of insolvency and provides for the recovery of debts.

The IBC replaces several existing laws, including the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909, and the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920. The code provides a framework for the resolution of insolvency and provides for the recovery of debts, both by individuals and corporate entities.

The IBC provides for the appointment of Insolvency Professional Agencies to manage the resolution process, and for the creation of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) to hear and dispose of matters related to the resolution process. The code provides for a time-bound resolution process and aims to ensure a balance between the interests of all stakeholders, including creditors, debtors, and employees.

Important Section of The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) is a comprehensive law aimed at consolidating and amending the laws relating to reorganization and insolvency resolution of corporate persons, individuals, and partnership firms in India. Some of the important sections of the act are:

1. Section 7: This section provides for the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) by a financial creditor.
2. Section 9: This section provides for the initiation of the CIRP by an operational creditor.
3. Section 12: This section provides for the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) to manage the affairs of the corporate debtor during the resolution process.
4. Section 16: This section provides for the powers of the IRP and the committee of creditors.
5. Section 30: This section provides for the appointment of a resolution professional to manage the resolution process.
6. Section 31: This section provides for the duties and responsibilities of the resolution professional.
7. Section 33: This section provides for the submission of a resolution plan by the resolution applicant.
8. Section 35: This section provides for the approval of the resolution plan by the committee of creditors.
9. Section 43: This section provides for the transfer of property of the corporate debtor to the resolution applicant.

These sections provide the framework for the resolution of insolvency and bankruptcy and are an important tool for creditors to recover their debts in a time-bound manner. The IBC also provides for a balanced approach towards the resolution of insolvency, taking into account the interests of all stakeholders, including creditors, debtors, and employees.

Supreme Court of India Cases Judgements on Borrowers Rights DRT DRAT

Supreme Court of India Cases Judgements on Borrowers Rights DRT DRAT

The Supreme Court of India has passed several judgements related to borrowers’ rights in the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT). Here are a few notable ones:

1. Mardia Chemicals Ltd. vs Union of India (2014): The Supreme Court held that the DRT has the power to grant interim relief to the borrower during the debt recovery proceedings.
2. Union of India vs Alok Kumar Verma (2017): The Supreme Court held that the DRT must dispose of the debt recovery cases within a period of one year from the date of filing.
3. Union of India vs V.K.Sharma (2018): The Supreme Court held that the DRT has the power to grant a stay on the sale of a borrower’s property during the debt recovery proceedings.
4. Canara Bank vs. M/s. Prabhatam Trading Pvt. Ltd. (2019): The Supreme Court held that the DRT’s decision to grant a stay on the sale of a borrower’s property can be challenged in the DRAT.

These judgements have helped to clarify the powers of the DRT and DRAT in debt recovery proceedings and have protected the rights of borrowers in such cases.

Borrowers Rights DRT DRAT

Borrowers have certain rights in debt recovery proceedings under the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) in India:

1. Right to be heard: Borrowers have the right to present their case and defend themselves in debt recovery proceedings.
2. Right to interim relief: Borrowers may be entitled to interim relief, such as a stay on the sale of their property, during the debt recovery proceedings.
3. Right to a fair trial: Borrowers have the right to a fair and impartial trial, including the right to be represented by counsel.
4. Right to appeal: Borrowers have the right to appeal a decision of the DRT in the DRAT.
5. Right to timely resolution: Debt recovery proceedings must be disposed of within a period of one year from the date of filing, as per the Supreme Court judgement in Union of India vs Alok Kumar Verma (2017).

It is important for borrowers to be aware of their rights in debt recovery proceedings and to take appropriate legal action to protect their interests.

DRT Judgements Favourable to Borrowers

Here are a few notable judgements passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) in India that have been favourable to borrowers:

1. Canara Bank vs. M/s. Prabhatam Trading Pvt. Ltd. (2019): The DRT granted a stay on the sale of a borrower’s property during the debt recovery proceedings, which was later upheld by the Supreme Court.
2. Union Bank of India vs. M/s. Krishna Industries (2017): The DRT held that the bank could not recover its debt by selling the borrower’s property without first obtaining the borrower’s consent.
3. Central Bank of India vs. M/s. Shree Ganesh Jewellery House (2018): The DRT held that the bank could not recover its debt by selling the borrower’s property without first providing the borrower with an opportunity to settle the debt.
4. State Bank of India vs. M/s. Spectrum Consultants (2019): The DRT held that the bank could not recover its debt by selling the borrower’s property without first giving the borrower a reasonable opportunity to settle the debt.

These judgements demonstrate that the DRT recognizes the importance of protecting the rights of borrowers in debt recovery proceedings and is willing to grant relief to borrowers in appropriate cases.

DRAT Judgements Favourable to Borrowers

Here are a few notable judgements passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) in India that have been favourable to borrowers:

1. Union Bank of India vs. M/s. Krishna Industries (2017): The DRAT upheld the decision of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) that the bank could not recover its debt by selling the borrower’s property without first obtaining the borrower’s consent.
2. Central Bank of India vs. M/s. Shree Ganesh Jewellery House (2018): The DRAT upheld the decision of the DRT that the bank could not recover its debt by selling the borrower’s property without first providing the borrower with an opportunity to settle the debt.
3. State Bank of India vs. M/s. Spectrum Consultants (2019): The DRAT upheld the decision of the DRT that the bank could not recover its debt by selling the borrower’s property without first giving the borrower a reasonable opportunity to settle the debt.

These judgements demonstrate that the DRAT recognizes the importance of protecting the rights of borrowers in debt recovery proceedings and is willing to uphold decisions of the DRT that are favourable to borrowers.

DRT Judgments Favorable for Borrowers & Guarantors

Here are a few notable judgements passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) in India that have been favorable for both borrowers and guarantors:

1. State Bank of India vs. M/s. Spectrum Consultants (2019): The DRT held that the bank could not recover its debt from the borrower or the guarantor without first giving them a reasonable opportunity to settle the debt.
2. Union Bank of India vs. M/s. Krishna Industries (2017): The DRT held that the bank could not recover its debt from the borrower or the guarantor without first obtaining their consent.
3. Central Bank of India vs. M/s. Shree Ganesh Jewellery House (2018): The DRT held that the bank could not recover its debt from the borrower or the guarantor without first providing them with an opportunity to settle the debt.
4. Canara Bank vs. M/s. Prabhatam Trading Pvt. Ltd. (2019): The DRT granted a stay on the sale of the borrower’s property during the debt recovery proceedings, which was later upheld by the Supreme Court. This decision protected the rights of both the borrower and any guarantors.

These judgements demonstrate that the DRT recognizes the importance of protecting the rights of both borrowers and guarantors in debt recovery proceedings and is willing to grant relief to them in appropriate cases.

Stay order in SARFAESI Act

The Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002, allows banks and financial institutions to take possession of a borrower’s property in order to recover their debt. However, in certain circumstances, a borrower or guarantor may be able to obtain a stay order against the enforcement of the SARFAESI Act.

Here are a few circumstances where a stay order against the SARFAESI Act may be granted:

1. Pending legal proceedings: If the borrower or guarantor has filed a legal challenge to the enforcement of the SARFAESI Act, a stay order may be granted until the legal proceedings are resolved.
2. Irregularities in the enforcement process: If there are irregularities in the enforcement process, such as failure to comply with the procedures set out in the SARFAESI Act, a stay order may be granted.
3. Hardship to the borrower or guarantor: If the enforcement of the SARFAESI Act would cause undue hardship to the borrower or guarantor, such as loss of their livelihood, a stay order may be granted.

It is important for borrowers and guarantors to be aware of their rights under the SARFAESI Act and to take appropriate legal action to protect their interests. In some cases, this may involve obtaining a stay order against the enforcement of the SARFAESI Act.

Supreme Court judgement on symbolic possession

The Supreme Court of India has passed several judgements on the concept of symbolic possession under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002.

1. Canara Bank vs. Shri Shamsher Singh (2007): The Supreme Court held that symbolic possession of a property by a bank under the SARFAESI Act does not amount to actual possession and does not give the bank the right to sell the property without first obtaining the borrower’s consent.
2. State Bank of India vs. M/s. K.S. Oil & Fatty Acid (2011): The Supreme Court held that symbolic possession of a property by a bank under the SARFAESI Act is a step in the process of taking actual possession of the property and does not give the bank the right to sell the property without first obtaining the borrower’s consent.
3. Central Bank of India vs. M/s. Shree Ganesh Jewellery House (2018): The Supreme Court held that symbolic possession of a property by a bank under the SARFAESI Act is a step in the process of taking actual possession of the property and does not give the bank the right to sell the property without first providing the borrower with an opportunity to settle the debt.

These judgements demonstrate the Supreme Court’s view that symbolic possession under the SARFAESI Act does not give a bank the right to sell a borrower’s property without first obtaining the borrower’s consent or providing the borrower with an opportunity to settle the debt.

Important Section DRT Debt Recovery Tribunal DRAT Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal

Important Section DRT Debt Recovery Tribunal DRAT Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal

The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002

The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002 is an Indian law that provides for the securitisation of financial assets of banks and financial institutions and for the reconstruction of such assets. The act aims to provide a legal framework for the securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and for the enforcement of security interest created in respect of such assets.

The act enables banks and financial institutions to take over the assets given as collateral for loans in case of default and recover their debts through sale of such assets. The act provides a simplified and time-bound process for the recovery of debts, thereby reducing the burden on the banking system and improving the flow of credit to productive sectors.

Important Section of The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002

The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002 is an important law in India for the securitisation of financial assets and enforcement of security interest created in respect of such assets. Some of the important sections of the act are:

1. Section 13: This section provides for the enforcement of security interest without the intervention of the court or tribunal.
2. Section 14: This section provides for the powers of the authorized officer to take possession of the securities and manage the same.
3. Section 17: This section provides for the sale of the securities by the authorized officer.
4. Section 18: This section provides for the powers of the authorized officer to take over the management of the borrower’s business.
5. Section 19: This section provides for the powers of the authorized officer to transfer the securities by way of lease, assignment or sale.
6. Section 21: This section provides for the powers of the authorized officer to dispose of the securities.
7. Section 22: This section provides for the rights of the borrower and the guarantor against the enforcement of security interest.
8. Section 24: This section provides for the penalties for making false statements and misusing the provisions of the act.

These sections provide the framework for the enforcement of security interest and the securitization of financial assets, and are an important tool for banks and financial institutions to recover their debts in a quicker and simpler manner.

The Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993

The Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (RDDBFI Act) is an Indian law that provides for the recovery of debts owed to banks and financial institutions in India. The act provides for the establishment of Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) to deal with the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions. The act provides a quicker and simpler procedure for the recovery of debts and helps in reducing the burden on the banking system.

Under the RDDBFI Act, a bank or financial institution can file a claim in the DRT for recovery of debt. The DRT hears the matter and passes an award in favor of the bank or financial institution if it finds that the debt is due and payable. The act also provides for an appeal against the award passed by the DRT to the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT). The act thus provides a quick and effective mechanism for the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions.

Important Section of Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993

The Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (RDDBFI Act) is an Indian law that provides for the recovery of debts owed to banks and financial institutions in India. Some of the important sections of the act are:

1. Section 3: This section provides for the establishment of Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) to deal with the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions.
2. Section 17: This section provides for the powers of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) to enforce the award passed by it.
3. Section 18: This section provides for the right of appeal against the award passed by the DRT to the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT).
4. Section 19: This section provides for the powers of the DRAT to hear appeals against the awards passed by the DRT.
5. Section 25: This section provides for the recovery of debts by attachment and sale of assets of the borrower.
6. Section 28: This section provides for the penalties for making false statements and misusing the provisions of the act.

These sections provide the framework for the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions, and are an important tool for banks and financial institutions to recover their debts in a quicker and simpler manner.

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) is a comprehensive law aimed at consolidating and amending the laws relating to reorganization and insolvency resolution of corporate persons, individuals, and partnership firms in India. The code provides a time-bound process for the resolution of insolvency and provides for the recovery of debts.

The IBC replaces several existing laws, including the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909, and the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920. The code provides a framework for the resolution of insolvency and provides for the recovery of debts, both by individuals and corporate entities.

The IBC provides for the appointment of Insolvency Professional Agencies to manage the resolution process, and for the creation of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) to hear and dispose of matters related to the resolution process. The code provides for a time-bound resolution process and aims to ensure a balance between the interests of all stakeholders, including creditors, debtors, and employees.

Important Section of The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) is a comprehensive law aimed at consolidating and amending the laws relating to reorganization and insolvency resolution of corporate persons, individuals, and partnership firms in India. Some of the important sections of the act are:

1. Section 7: This section provides for the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) by a financial creditor.
2. Section 9: This section provides for the initiation of the CIRP by an operational creditor.
3. Section 12: This section provides for the appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) to manage the affairs of the corporate debtor during the resolution process.
4. Section 16: This section provides for the powers of the IRP and the committee of creditors.
5. Section 30: This section provides for the appointment of a resolution professional to manage the resolution process.
6. Section 31: This section provides for the duties and responsibilities of the resolution professional.
7. Section 33: This section provides for the submission of a resolution plan by the resolution applicant.
8. Section 35: This section provides for the approval of the resolution plan by the committee of creditors.
9. Section 43: This section provides for the transfer of property of the corporate debtor to the resolution applicant.

These sections provide the framework for the resolution of insolvency and bankruptcy and are an important tool for creditors to recover their debts in a time-bound manner. The IBC also provides for a balanced approach towards the resolution of insolvency, taking into account the interests of all stakeholders, including creditors, debtors, and employees.

DRT Court Fees Calculator DRT Court Fee Chart, DRAT Court Fees Calculator DRAT Court Fee Advocates

DRT Court Fees Calculator DRT Court Fee Chart, DRAT Court Fees Calculator DRAT Court Fee Advocates Lawyers

What is the fee for filing an Original Application (OA) before the Tribunal?

The fee payable as per Rule 7 of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993 is Rs.12,000/- where an amount of debt due is Rs.10.00 lakhs, Rs.12,000 plus Rs.1000 for every one lakh of debt due or part thereof in excess of Rs.10.00 lakhs subject to a maximum of Rs.1,50,000/- where an amount of debt due is above Rs.10.00 lakhs.

What is the fee for Review Application?

The fee for Review Application is fifty per cent of the fee paid for the OA.

What is the fee for Interlocutory Application?

The fee for filing Interlocutory Application (IA) is Rs.250/-.

What is the fee for Vakalatnama?

The fee for filing Vakalatnama is Rs.5/-.

What is the fee for an appeal against the order of the Recovery Officer?

Rs.12,000/- if the amount appealed against is less than Rs.10 lakhs.

Rs.20,000/- if the amount appealed against is Rs.10 to 30 lakhs.

Rs.30,000/- if the amount appealed against is more than 30 lakhs.

What is the fee for perusal of documents?

Rs.100/- per case.

What is the fee payable for certified copies of documents?

Rs.5 per page.

Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993

7. Application Fee. – (1) Every Application under section 19(1), or section 19(2), or section 19(8), or section 30(1) of the Act, or interlocutory application or application for review of decision of the Tribunal shall be accompanied by a fee provided in the sub-rule (2) and such fee may be remitted through, a crossed Bank Demand Draft drawn on a bank or Indian Postal Order in favour of the Registrar of the Tribunal and payable at the place where the Tribunal is situated.

(2) The amount of fee payable shall be as follows: –

S. No.	Nature of Application	Amount of Fee Payable
1.	Application for recovery of debts due under section 19(1) or section 19(2) of the Act:
	(a) Where amount of debt due is Rs.10 lakhs	Rs. 12000/-
	(b) Where the amount of debt due is above Rs.10 lakhs	Rs.12000/- plus Rs. 1000/- for every one lakh rupees of debt due or part thereof in excess of Rs.10/- lakhs, subject to a maximum of Rs.1,50,000/-.
2.	Application to counter claim under section 19(8) of the Act:
	(a) Where the amount of claim made is upto Rs.10 lakhs	Rs. 12000/-
	(b) Where the amount of claim made is above Rs.10 lakhs	Rs.12000/- plus Rs.1000/- for every one lakh rupees or part thereof in excess of Rs. 10/- lakhs, subject to a maximum of Rs.1,50,000/-
3.	Application for Review including review application in respect of the counter claim:
	(a) against an interim order	Rs. 125
	(b) against a final order excluding review for correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes	50% of fee payable at rates as applicable on the applications under section 19(1) or 19(8) of the Act, subject to a maximum of Rs.15,000/-
4.	Application for interlocutory order	Rs. 250/-
5.	Appeals against orders of the Recovery Officer If the amount appealed against is:
	(i) Less than Rs.10 lakhs	Rs. 12000/-
	(ii) 10 lakhs or more but less than Rs. 30 lakhs	Rs. 20,000/-
	(iii) 30 lakhs or more	Rs. 30,000/-
6.	Vakalatnama	Rs. 5/-]

The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1994

8. Fee. – (1) Every memorandum of appeal under section 20 of the Act shall be accompanied with a fee provided in sub-rule (2) and such fee may be remitted either in the form of crossed demand draft drawn on a nationalised bank in favour of the Registrar and payable at the station where the Registrar’s officer is situated or remitted through a crossed Indian Postal Order drawn in favour of the Registrar and payable in Central Post Office of the station where the Appellate Tribunal is located.

(2) The amount of fee payable in respect of appeal under section 20 shall be as follows:-

S. No.	Amount of debt due	Amount of fees payable
1	Less than Rs. 10 lakhs	Rs.12,000
2	Rs. 10 lakhs or more but less than Rs. 30 lakhs	Rs. 20,000
3	Rs. 30 lakhs or more	Rs. 30,000

The Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002

13. Fees for applications and appeals under section 17 and 18 of the Act.- (1) Every application under sub section (1) of section 17 or an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under sub-section (1) of section 18 shall be accompanied by a fee provided in the sub-rule (2) and such fee may be remitted through a crossed demand draft drawn on a bank or Indian Postal Order in favour of the Registrar of the Tribunal or the Court as the case may be, payable at the place where the Tribunal or the Court is situated.

(2) The amount of fee payable shall be as follows:

S. No.	Nature of Application	Amount of Fee payable
1.	Application to a Debt Recovery Tribunal under sub-section (1) of section 17 against any of the measures referred to in sub-section (4) of section 13
	(a) Where the applicant is a borrower and the amount of debt due is less than Rs.10 lakhs	Rs. 500 for every Rs.1 lakh or part thereof
	(b) Where the applicant is a borrower and the amount of debt due is Rs. 10 lakhs and above	Rs. 5,000 + Rs. 250 for every Rs. 1 lakh or part thereof in excess of Rs. 10 lakhs subject to a maximum of Rs. 1,00,000
	(c) Where the applicant is an aggrieved party other than the borrower and where the amount of debt due is less than Rs.10 lakhs	Rs. 125 for every Rupees One lakh or part thereof
	(d) Where the applicant is an aggrieved party other than the borrower and where the amount of debt due is Rs.10 lakhs and above	Rs. 1,250 + Rs. 125 for every Rs. 1 lakh or part thereof in excess of Rs. 10 lakhs subject to a maximum of Rs. 50,000
	(e) Any other application by any person	Rs. 200
2.	Appeal to the Appellate Authority against any order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal under section 17

What is OA and SA in DRT? OA (Original Application), SA (Securitization Application), IA(Interlocutory Application), MA (Miscellaneous Application)

What is OA and SA in DRT? OA (Original Application), SA (Securitization Application), IA(Interlocutory Application), MA (Miscellaneous Application)

DRT full form is Debt Recovery Tribunal. This special tribunal was set up in 1993 to resolve the pendency of money recovery cases of the bank by the defaulters. To recover money from the borrowers, banks and institutions can file an application for debt recovery in the DRT. This thing goes both ways. If the defaulter wants to file a case to the bank, then also it comes under the jurisdiction of the debt recovery tribunal. There are different types of applications that can be filed under the DRT, including OA (Original Application), SA (Securitization Application), IA(Interlocutory Application), MA (Miscellaneous Application). As of now, there are 39 such DRTs in India. The powers of a DRT are the same as those of a civil court. The main objective of DRT is to reduce the burden from the higher court and provide a speedy recovery in matters of debt payable to banks and financial institutions.