Home  /  Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993  /  Section 22

Section 22: Procedure and powers of the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal

Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1993
Section 21 All 37 Sections of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 Section 23

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 22

Section 22 governs the procedure and powers of the DRT and DRAT, declaring that while the Tribunals are not bound by the technical procedure of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, they are guided by the principles of natural justice and possess specific statutory powers of a Civil Court.

  • Liberation from Technical CPC Rules: Sub-section (1) mandates that the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal shall not be bound by the rigid procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice and have power to regulate their own procedure.
  • Specific Civil Court Powers: Sub-section (2) vests the DRT and DRAT with the powers of a Civil Court under the CPC in respect of: summoning and enforcing attendance on oath, requiring discovery and production of documents, receiving evidence on affidavits, issuing commissions, reviewing decisions, and setting aside ex parte orders or default dismissals.
  • Deemed Judicial Proceeding Status: Sub-section (3) provides that any proceeding before the Tribunal or Appellate Tribunal shall be deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of Sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code, and the Tribunal shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for the purposes of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Industrial Credit and Investment Corpn. of India Ltd. v. Grapco Industries Ltd. (1999) 4 SCC 710: The Supreme Court held that while the DRT is not bound by the CPC, it has the power under Section 22 to grant ex parte interim orders to prevent the debtor from alienating properties, guided by principles of natural justice and commercial urgency.
  • Standard Chartered Bank v. Dharminder Bhohi (2013) 15 SCC 341: The Supreme Court ruled that the procedural flexibility conferred by Section 22(1) does not confer inherent powers akin to Section 151 CPC; the Tribunal cannot create substantive rights or pass orders that conflict with the express provisions of the RDB Act.
  • Allahabad Bank v. Canara Bank (2000) 4 SCC 406: The Supreme Court held that the summary procedure under Section 22 empowers the DRT to adjudicate complex claims expeditiously without requiring strict adherence to the formal trial stages prescribed by the CPC.
  • Nahar Industrial Enterprises Ltd. v. Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corp. (2009) 8 SCC 646: The Supreme Court held that although the DRT exercises civil court powers under Section 22(2), it remains a specialized statutory tribunal of limited jurisdiction and cannot be treated as a plenary Civil Court.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In DRT proceedings, evidence is primarily tendered on affidavits under Section 22(2)(c). If cross-examination of a bank manager or valuer is essential to prove fraud or forged signatures, an application must be moved under Section 22(2)(a) specifically setting out the necessity of oral examination; cross-examination is not an absolute right in DRT summary proceedings and will be declined if sought merely to delay adjudication.

Section 21 All 37 Sections of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 Section 23