Allowed

Ashok Wood Works v. Indian Overseas Bank

DRAT18 Sept 2025MISC APPEAL/17/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal allowed an appeal against the DRT's order allowing an amendment to claim interest at 18% p.a. It set aside the amendment and directed the Presiding Officer to adjudicate pendante lite interest ad hoc.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is allowed to the extent that the amendment allowing specific interest calculation is set aside; interest to be adjudicated by the Presiding Officer.

Ashok Wood Works versus Indian Overseas Bank — Arbitration | DRAT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

¶2

Dated the 18^th of September 2025

¶3

PRESENT: Hon’ble Mr. Justice G. Chandrasekharan

¶4

CHAIRPERSON

¶5

MA 17/2021

¶6

(Arising out of the order in IA 2110/2017 in TA 688 of 2017 on the file of the DRT, Madurai)

¶7

Between

¶8

M/s Ashok Wood Works, a Partnership firm

¶9

Rep. by its Partners, Mohan N. Patel,

¶10

Door No.46/4A Bye Pass Road,

¶11

Ariyamangalam, Trichy 620 010.

¶12

M/s. Ashok Saw Mill, a Partnership firm, Rep. by its Partners, Haris N. Patel, Door No.14, SIDCO Industrial Estate, Tiruverumbur, Trichy 620 010 & 8 others.

¶13

Mr. Narayan K. Patel, Plot No.16 & 17, Lakshmipuram, Ariyamangalam, Trichirapalli 620 010.

¶14

Mrs. Saraswathy N Patel, Plot No.16 & 17, Lakshmipuram, Ariyamangalam, Trichirapalli 620 010.

¶15

Mr. Harish N. Patel, Plot No.16 & 17, Lakshmipuram, Ariyamangalam, Trichirapalli 620 010.

¶16

¶17

Mrs. Pramila H Patel, Plot No.16 & 17, Lakshmipuram, Ariyamangalam, Trichirapalli 620 010.

¶18

Mr. Mohan N. Patel, Plot No.16 & 17, Lakshmipuram, Ariyamangalam, Trichirapalli 620 010.

¶19

Mr. Panbai N Patel, Plot No.16 & 17, Lakshmipuram, Ariyamangalam, Trichirapalli 620 010.

¶20

… Appellants

¶21

And

¶22

Indian Overseas Bank, Trichy Main Branch, 144 West Bouleward Road, Trichy, Trichy District, Rep. by its Chief Manager .

¶23

Mr. Nareshi K. Patel, Plot No.16 & 17, Lakshmipuram, Ariyamangalam, Trichirapalli 620 010.

¶24

Mr. Khimji Somji Patel, Plot No.16 & 17, Lakshmipuram, Ariyamangalam, Trichirapalli 620 010.

¶25

.. Respondents

¶26

Counsel for Appellants : Mr. A. Periyasamy

¶27

Counsel for Respondent-1 : Mr. F.B. Benjamin George R2 & R3 given up

¶28

¶29

ORDER

¶30

This appeal is filed against the order passed in IA 2110/2017, by the learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Madurai.

¶31

Application in IA 2110/2017 was filed to amend the relief sought as detailed in particulars of amendment i.e. to incorporate the sale of certain properties, apportionment of sale proceeds for the loan due and payment of Rs.2 lakhs as per the direction of Hon’ble High Court and the amount liable to be paid as on 30.09.2017. Next prayer is to delete the prayer ‘a’ to ‘c’ in the original application and to substitute with the new prayer as ‘a’ to ‘c’ in the original application.

¶32

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants have no objection with regard to the incorporation of the details of sale of certain properties, apportionment of sale proceeds towards the loan account and payment of Rs.2 lakhs made as per the direction of the Hon’ble High Court, Madras, however, the appellant has serious objection with regard to the amendment sought in the prayer ‘a’ to ‘c’ claiming a sum of Rs.41,30,80,247/- as on 30/09/2017 and interest at the rate 18% p.a. on Rs.41,30,80,247/- with quarterly rest from 01/10/2007.

¶33

¶34

It is further submitted that as per the original prayer made in

¶35

the original application, the claim was for recovery of Rs.3,64,41,844/- as on 21.12.2003 and further interest from 22.12.2003 at the rate of 18% p.a. with quarterly rests and other charges till the date of payment. This OA was filed in the year 2003 and the same is still pending. Pendante lite interest from the date of filing the OA in the year 2003, and post disposal interest rate have to be adjudicated by the learned Presiding Officer. Therefore, determining the interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from 22/12/2003 to 30/09/2017 and on the claim of Rs.41,30,80,247/- from 01.10.2007 when the original application is still pending is not proper and it is illegal. Therefore, the learned counsel for the appellants seeks to set aside the impugned order.

¶36

5 . There is no representation for the respondents. This appeal is pending

¶37

from the year 2021. On going through the records, this Tribunal finds that the learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Madurai, allowed the I A 2110/2017 in its entirety. It is settled preposition of Law that pendente lite interest and post disposal interest is subject to the discretionary powers of the Court or the Presiding Officer. When that be the case, the prayer sought for amending the claim amount including interest at the rate of 18% p.a. on Rs.41,30,80,247/- is not correct according to the well settled Proposition of Law. Therefore, this part of the amendment granted by the learned Presiding Officer is set aside. It is directed that pendent lite interest and the post disposal interest from the date of filing of the OA and after the disposal are to be adjudicated by the learned Presiding Officer, DRT,

¶38

¶39

Madurai on merits and in accordance with law at the time of final disposal of the OA.

¶40

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed.

¶41

In the result, this appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶42

Parties are directed to bear their own costs.

¶43

Pending IAs if any, shall stand closed.

¶44

[Dictated in the open Court to Steno (RA), transcribed by her, corrected, signed by me, this 18^th day of September, 2025]

¶45

Sd/-

¶46

(JUSTICE G. CHANDRASEKHARAN) CHAIRPERSON

¶47

Ashok Wood Works v. Indian Overseas Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Wood Works v. Indian Overseas Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Varalakshmi versus Indian Bank

Jaffer Ali versus Equitas Small Finance Bank Limited

Cadyche Automation and Office Solution Pvt. Ltd. versus Canara Bank

Inbaraj versus Indian Bank

Ashok Wood Works versus Indian Overseas Bank

Johny Mathew versus Hdfc Bank