DRT Guwahati: Debt Recovery Tribunal, Jurisdiction, Powers and Role in Bank Recovery Cases
The Debts Recovery Tribunal Guwahati is a specialised statutory forum dealing with recovery disputes involving banks, financial institutions, borrowers, guarantors and parties affected by enforcement of secured financial assets across the North-Eastern region. Official tribunal records identify the institution as the “Debts Recovery Tribunal Guwahati” and currently list its address as Suwarna Bhawan, House No. 12, New Town Path, near Hanuman Mandir, G.S. Road, Ulubari, Guwahati-781007, Assam. The tribunal’s official 2026 cause lists show continuing proceedings involving Original Applications, Securitisation Applications, interlocutory applications and other recovery-related matters.
The legal foundation of the DRT system is principally the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, commonly called the RDB Act. The Department of Financial Services explains that DRTs were established to provide specialised and expeditious adjudication and recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions. The DRT system also operates alongside the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, or SARFAESI Act, which provides the statutory framework for securitisation, reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interests.
DRT Guwahati has a distinctive regional importance because its official records describe the tribunal as covering the North-Eastern States of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh and Tripura. An official DRT Guwahati order expressly identifies the tribunal as the tribunal of these seven states. A 2025 Calcutta High Court judgment also recorded that DRT Guwahati was constituted for the North-Eastern region comprising these states.
The regional character of DRT Guwahati means that its proceedings can involve banks, borrowers and secured assets located well beyond Assam. The official 2026 cause lists provide examples involving parties from Assam as well as Meghalaya, Manipur and Mizoram. In July 2026, for instance, the tribunal listed a matter involving Motior Rahman Mondal and Meghalaya Rural Bank, while other proceedings involved borrowers and businesses from different parts of the North-Eastern region.
One of the principal categories of proceedings before DRT Guwahati is the Original Application, commonly abbreviated as OA. Under the DRT framework, banks and financial institutions can institute Original Applications seeking recovery of debts. The 2026 Guwahati cause lists show frequent filing of new OAs by State Bank of India, Bank of Baroda, UCO Bank, HDFC Bank, Axis Bank, Indian Bank, Canara Bank, Punjab National Bank and other financial institutions.
The June 11, 2026 cause list provides a clear illustration of the tribunal’s current workload. It included fresh OAs filed by Bank of Baroda against Krishna Flex and Graphic and others, State Bank of India against individual and business borrowers, UCO Bank against Anjali Das, Bank of Baroda against Shakshi Enterprise, Canara Bank against Bonti Dyna Roofing and North Eastern Development Finance Corporation Ltd. against Hotel Phoenix. These matters demonstrate the range of commercial and individual financial disputes reaching the tribunal.
Another June 10, 2026 cause list showed fresh OAs filed by Axis Bank, UCO Bank, HDFC Bank, Bank of Baroda and Indian Bank. The listed defendants included individuals as well as businesses such as Sai Baba Traders and S.S. Trading. The variety of proceedings illustrates that DRT Guwahati’s work is not limited to large corporate borrowers but also encompasses smaller commercial enterprises and individual borrowers.
Securitisation Applications, or SAs, form another important component of the Guwahati tribunal’s workload. An SA generally arises under the SARFAESI Act and may be filed by a borrower, guarantor or other affected party challenging measures taken by a secured creditor. Current Guwahati records show SAs accompanied by applications for stay, stay of sale, preponement and other interim reliefs.
The July 14, 2026 cause list illustrates the urgency that can arise in SARFAESI-related disputes. One proceeding involved an application for stay by Fakar Uddin Ahmed against Axis Bank, while another involved Sujit Das and another against ICICI Bank with applications for stay and stay of sale. Such listings are important because SARFAESI disputes can concern enforcement or sale of secured assets. However, the listing of a stay application does not itself mean that the tribunal granted the requested stay; the corresponding order must be examined to determine the actual result.
A particularly detailed example appeared in the May 29, 2026 cause list. A Securitisation Application filed by Julee Kotoky against ICICI Bank contained multiple interlocutory applications, including applications for stay and preponement. Other matters on the same list included applications for ex-parte orders, stay, waiver, urgency, settlement and withdrawal. This demonstrates that DRT proceedings frequently involve procedural applications alongside the principal OA or SA.
DRT Guwahati also deals with applications connected with attachment and other protective measures. A 2025 official cause list, for example, included an interlocutory application in an OA filed by State Bank of India against Nayak Infrastructure Private Limited seeking attachment before judgment. Such an application is procedurally different from the final adjudication of the underlying recovery claim, and the actual relief granted can only be determined from the tribunal’s order.
The tribunal’s records also show that recovery proceedings can continue for several years. The 2025 cause list included OA/318/2020 involving State Bank of India and Nayak Infrastructure Private Limited, along with other older proceedings. It also included OA/382/2024 and several 2025 matters, demonstrating that the docket contains a mixture of older continuing litigation and comparatively recent cases.
An important stage of DRT litigation is the issuance and implementation of a Recovery Certificate. Once a recovery claim is adjudicated and a recovery certificate is issued, the matter can proceed through the recovery mechanism provided under the statutory framework. An official DRT Guwahati order in OA No. 397/2022 involving HDFC Bank and A & B Enterprises recorded the tribunal’s direction to issue a Recovery Certificate for ₹21,37,504.47 against the defendants. This illustrates the connection between adjudication of the bank’s claim and the subsequent recovery process.
The tribunal’s records also demonstrate that recovery proceedings can involve very different types of borrowers and businesses. The official cause lists contain matters involving hotels and resorts, automobile and trading businesses, manufacturing and industrial enterprises, shops, infrastructure companies and individual borrowers. In July 2026, for example, proceedings included UCO Bank against RMD Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. and State Bank of India against Golap Jyoti Industry Rice Mill.
The presence of regional financial institutions is another important feature of DRT Guwahati. Assam Gramin Vikash Bank and Mizoram Rural Bank appear in the tribunal’s records alongside large national banks. The October 2025 cause list, for example, included an OA filed by Mizoram Rural Bank against Lalremsiami and another OA filed by the same bank against M/s Zarzokimi, while Assam Gramin Vikash Bank was involved in proceedings against Loknath Oil Mill.
North-Eastern financial institutions therefore form an important part of the tribunal’s workload, alongside national public-sector and private banks. The July 2026 records included proceedings involving Meghalaya Rural Bank, while June and July records contained matters involving State Bank of India, Bank of Baroda, Canara Bank, HDFC Bank, Axis Bank, UCO Bank, Punjab National Bank and other institutions. This reflects the tribunal’s role as a regional recovery forum rather than a tribunal dealing exclusively with one state or one category of financial institution.
Virtual hearing facilities have also become part of the tribunal’s operating arrangements. Official 2026 cause lists for DRT Guwahati provide Webex meeting facilities and instructions requiring participants to mention their full name and case number when joining. The June and July cause lists show these virtual-hearing arrangements alongside the physical tribunal information. Parties should nevertheless rely on the latest cause list or specific direction in their case because hearing arrangements can change.
The tribunal’s digital cause-list system is particularly useful for identifying the procedural stage of a matter. A listing may indicate admission hearing, necessary order, hearing, service report, rejoinder, written objection, withdrawal petition or other procedural activity. These remarks provide an indication of what is scheduled, but they should not be treated as a substitute for the actual judicial order. The distinction is particularly important in cases involving applications for stay or other interim relief.
For borrowers and guarantors, proceedings before DRT Guwahati can have significant financial and property-related consequences. An OA may involve a bank’s claim for recovery of outstanding debt, while an SA may challenge measures taken under SARFAESI. Depending on the case, the proceedings can also involve secured property, guarantees, auction-related actions, applications for stay, applications for release of property or documents and other interim requests. The precise rights and remedies depend upon the facts and procedural stage of the individual case.
For banks and financial institutions, DRT proceedings provide a specialised statutory mechanism for pursuing recovery claims. The Government of India describes the broader DRT system as being established specifically for expeditious adjudication and recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions. The Department of Financial Services currently states that 39 DRTs and five DRATs are functioning across India.
The appellate structure is also an important part of the DRT system. Orders of a DRT can, subject to the applicable statutory requirements and limitations, become the subject of proceedings before the appropriate Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal. A 2025 Calcutta High Court judgment involving a DRT Guwahati matter recorded that an aggrieved party had appealed a DRT Guwahati order before DRAT Kolkata. The judgment also discussed the relationship between the DRT located in Guwahati and the appellate tribunal exercising jurisdiction over the North-Eastern region.
The North-Eastern territorial scope of DRT Guwahati makes the tribunal particularly significant for financial disputes arising across Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh and Tripura. Official DRT orders consistently describe these seven states as the tribunal’s regional area. A party involved in a bank-recovery or SARFAESI dispute in one of these states therefore needs to establish the appropriate DRT jurisdiction from the applicable statutory and administrative arrangements rather than assuming that the physical location of the bank’s head office determines the tribunal.
For anyone searching for “DRT Guwahati,” the official location currently shown in the tribunal’s 2026 cause lists is Suwarna Bhawan, House No. 12, New Town Path, Near Hanuman Mandir, G.S. Road, Ulubari, Guwahati-781007, Assam. The same official records show active proceedings throughout 2026, including fresh OAs, SAs, interim applications, admission hearings, necessary orders and other procedural stages.
The current records therefore show DRT Guwahati functioning as a major specialised debt-recovery forum for the North-Eastern region. Its docket encompasses large public-sector banks, private banks, regional rural banks and other financial institutions, while the defendants include individuals, proprietorships, companies, hotels, traders, industrial enterprises and other businesses. The combination of OA recovery proceedings, SARFAESI-related SAs, interim applications and Recovery Certificate matters makes the tribunal an important part of the financial-legal infrastructure of the region.
Because cause lists and procedural directions can change, anyone dealing with a live DRT Guwahati matter should verify the latest official case record, cause list and order rather than relying on an older listing. The case number, proceeding type, latest order and hearing instructions are particularly important when determining the current status of a recovery or SARFAESI dispute. The official DRT electronic records remain the most direct source for checking what has actually been listed or ordered in an individual proceeding.
