Delhi HC: 12-Year Delay Leads to Dismissal of Loan Defaulters' Appeal

Summary: On February 26, 2026, the Delhi High Court turned down an appeal by Braham Din Pandey and others against The Sahu Cooperative Urban T/C Society Ltd. The appeal was dismissed because it was filed 12 years late, which the court found unreasonable.

Background of the Case

Braham Din Pandey and others had borrowed money from The Sahu Cooperative Urban T/C Society Ltd. They didn't pay it back, leading to a decision by an arbitrator. This decision, called an arbitral award, was made on January 25, 2012, against them. However, Braham Din Pandey and others said they never got a copy of this decision.

Petitioners' Attempts to Obtain the Award

Braham Din Pandey and others tried to get the arbitral award by filing a request under the RTI Act in November 2019, but they still didn't receive it. Later, in August 2021, they filed a complaint as consumers, during which the award was finally attached by the Registrar Co-operative Societies (RCS).

"The petitioners claimed they only became aware of the arbitral award in January 2023."

Court Proceedings and Arguments

On February 13, 2026, the court notified The Sahu Cooperative Urban T/C Society Ltd and RCS. Both said they didn't know when the award was given to Braham Din Pandey and others. Justice Prathiba M. Singh noted that the arbitral award didn't specify how Braham Din Pandey and others were informed.

Dismissal of Appeal

The court found that Braham Din Pandey and others admitted they knew about the award by October 2019. Despite this, they waited until February 2023 to file the appeal. The court concluded there was no valid reason for the delay.

"There is no explanation as to why the appeal was not preferred till as late as 10.02.2023."

Modification of the Award

The court changed the interest part of the award. Braham Din Pandey and others have to pay Rs. 4,51,681 with 7.5% interest from December 31, 2011, to April 30, 2026. If they pay late, the interest rate will be 9.5% from May 1, 2026.

Summary of the Verdict

The court dismissed the appeal due to an unjustified delay in filing. It also adjusted the interest payable on the amount owed, emphasizing the importance of timely appeals and suggesting the potential for mediation in similar cases.