[2025:RJ-JP:17939] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4880/2020 State Bank Of India, A Body Incorporated Under The State Bank Of India Act, 1955, Having Its Business Office At State Bank Bhawan, Madam Kama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 And Local Head Office At Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur And Administrative Office A-5, Nehru Palace, Tonk Road, Jaipur And Local Branch Office S.m.e.c.c.c., S.p.-1, Road No.1, Vishwakarma Industrial Area, Sikar Road, Jaipur Through Its Dy. Manager Shri Rudmal Raigar ----Petitioner Versus M/s Kartikeya Photos, Through Proprietor Smt. Nidhi Sharma, 141, Dungari House Complex, Indra Bazar, Jaipur, Other Address-38/355, Rajat Path, Mansarovar, Jaipur ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.Zakawat Ali For Respondent(s) : JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 29/04/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 03.04.2019 passed by the Registrar, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur (for short, ‘the DRT’) and the order dated 20.08.2019 passed by the Presiding Officer, DRT by which the appeal for restoring the original application, has been rejected. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that a recovery application was submitted by the petitioner before DRT, wherein certain minor defects have been pointed out by the Office i.e. check list, E-DRT form, cause title and index. Counsel submits that the defects pointed out by the Office could not be cured within the time fixed [2025:RJ-JP:17939] (2 of 2) [CW-4880/2020] by the Tribunal, hence, the case was dismissed in default for want of compliance of the order passed by the DRT. Counsel submits that aggrieved by the aforesaid order, an appeal was preferred before the Presiding Officer, however the same was also rejected vide impugned order dated 20.08.2019. Counsel submits that looking to the controversy involved in the matter, huge amount is required to be recovered from the borrower and the matter requires hearing and adjudication based upon its merit, hence the same should not be rejected on technical count of non-compliance of the pre-empotry order for removal of defects. 3. Considering the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition stands disposed of and the orders dated 03.04.2019 and 20.08.2019 are quashed and set aside. The petitioner is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed by the office within a period of fifteen days. 4. The petitioner is directed to appear before Tribunal on 26.05.2025. 5. In case, the defect(s) pointed out by the Office are not removed/cured, the Officer concerned would be at liberty to pass appropriate order. 6. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/9