With respect to the Debt Recovery Tribunals, consider the following statements:

It is presided over by a presiding officer who is appointed by the State govt.

He shall be qualified to be a District Judge.

No court have jurisdiction over this matter.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Question

Debt Recovery Tribunals were established to facilitate the debt recovery involving banks and other financial institutions with their customers. DRTs were set up after the passing of Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act (RDBBFI), 1993. Section 3 of the RDDBFI Act empowers the Central government to establish DRTs. Appeals against orders passed by DRTs lie before Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT).
Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) cannot hear claims of damages or deficiency of services or breach of contract or criminal negligence on the part of the lenders.
A DRT is presided over by a presiding officer who is appointed by the central govt. and who shall be qualified to be a District Judge; with tenure of 5 years or the age of 62, whichever is earlier.
No court in the country other than the SC and the HCs and that too, only under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution have jurisdiction over this matter.

GKToday Admin · Accepted Answer

Only 2

Debt Recovery Tribunals were established to facilitate the debt recovery involving banks and other financial institutions with their customers. DRTs were set up after the passing of Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act (RDBBFI), 1993. Section 3 of the RDDBFI Act empowers the Central government to establish DRTs. Appeals against orders passed by DRTs lie before Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT).
Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) cannot hear claims of damages or deficiency of services or breach of contract or criminal negligence on the part of the lenders.
A DRT is presided over by a presiding officer who is appointed by the central govt. and who shall be qualified to be a District Judge; with tenure of 5 years or the age of 62, whichever is earlier.
No court in the country other than the SC and the HCs and that too, only under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution have jurisdiction over this matter.

Current Affairs