Important Laws Relating to Recovery of Dues
Principles & Practices of Banking | Unit C · Chapter 29
Chapter 28 (NPAs) showed when a loan fails to perform. This chapter covers what the law allows the bank to do about it — five statutes that together form the legal arsenal for debt recovery: the DRB Act 1993 (tribunals), SARFAESI 2002 (enforcement without court), IBC 2016 (insolvency resolution), the Legal Services Authorities Act 1987 (Lok Adalats), and the Limitation Act (time limits for legal action).
📌 Why This Chapter Matters in JAIIB
Expect 8–10 questions spread across five statutes — this is one of the widest-coverage chapters in PPB Unit C. The examiner tests three clusters hard: (1) Numbers — ₹20L DRT threshold, 60-day SARFAESI notice, 50%/25% DRAT deposit, 180/330-day CIRP window, ₹1cr IBC threshold, ₹20L Lok Adalat ceiling; (2) Constitutional validity cases — Mardia Chemicals and Delhi High Court Bar Association; (3) IBC timelines — CIRP 180+extension, Fast Track 90+45, PPIRP 120 days with 90-day RP submission, IBBI composition (3+1+5 members). Limitation periods (3/12/30 years) are near-certain numerical questions.
Key Numbers & Thresholds — Chapter 29 at a Glance
Recovery of Debts & Bankruptcy Act, 1993 — Tribunals & Setup
Why the DRB Act Was Needed
Before 1993, banks had no dedicated forum — they had to queue behind ordinary civil litigants in district courts. Backlogs stretched recovery timelines to decades. Huge assets sat blocked as unproductive, draining bank productivity. Parliament enacted the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (now called the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act — DRB Act) to create a fast-track, dedicated tribunal system.
Constitutional Validity — The Landmark Case
The Delhi High Court Bar Association challenged the DRB Act before the Delhi High Court, which declared it unconstitutional. On appeal, the Supreme Court in Union of India vs Delhi High Court Bar Association (2002) 4 SCC 275 reversed that finding and upheld the Act's constitutional validity. The Act remains fully operative.
DRT & DRAT — Key Structural Facts
🧠 Mnemonic — DRB Act Key Numbers
"Twenty Lakhs, Four Years, Thirty Days, Half and Quarter" — the DRT number ladder.
DRB Act Procedure — Application to Recovery
Step-by-Step: Filing to Recovery Certificate
Doctrine of Election — DRT vs SARFAESI
Can a bank simultaneously pursue DRT proceedings AND SARFAESI enforcement? The Doctrine of Election says "if you choose one remedy, you cannot use another inconsistent remedy." It applies only when all three elements coexist:
Element 1
Two or more remedies exist
Element 2
The remedies are inconsistent with each other
Element 3
A choice of one has been made
⚠️ Supreme Court Ruling
DRT and SARFAESI are not inconsistent — they are complementary remedies. Therefore the Doctrine of Election does not apply. A bank may simultaneously pursue both or switch between them. Withdrawal of DRT application is NOT a pre-condition for taking SARFAESI action.
Overriding Effect & Priority
- →DRB Act has overriding effect over the Companies Act — leave of the company court is NOT needed to file a DRT case even if winding-up proceedings are pending (Allahabad Bank vs Canara Bank AIR 2000 SC 1535).
- →Recovery Officer has powers equivalent to a Tax Recovery Officer under Income Tax Act 1961 (Third Schedule).
- →Secured creditors have priority over all other debts including government dues — subject to IBC provisions.
- →Recovery certificate is deemed a court decree and can initiate winding-up proceedings against a company.
Free — no credit card needed
Register free to read the full guide
All 25 chapters covered, plus a downloadable PDF study pack.
- ✓ Full guide — all 24 IIBF syllabus chapters
- ✓ PDF study pack — download and read offline
- ✓ Name screening, alert categories, STR writing guide
- ✓ 2025–26 regulatory updates included