Remanded

Msn Eps Panels rep by its managing partner Mr Madhusudhan Mrs Mayuri and Ms Harshini v. Punjab National Bank

DRAT21 Nov 2025MISC APPEAL/70/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal disposed of an appeal against an interim order in a transitional settlement appeal. Since the main TSA was pending, the Tribunal remanded the matter for expeditious disposal while granting a temporary status quo for one month.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Presiding Officer to dispose of TSA 28/2024 on merits; order of status quo granted for one month.

Msn Eps Panels rep by its managing partner Mr Madhusudhan… — Company and Corporate | DRAT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

¶2

Dated the 21^st of November, 2025

¶3

PRESENT: Hon’ble Mr. Justice G. Chandrasekharan CHAIRPERSON

¶4

MA(SA) 70/2025

¶5

(IA 2105/2024 in TSA 28/2024 on the file of DRT-III, Chennai)

¶6

Between

¶7

M/s. MSN EPS Panels Rep. by its Managing Partner, Mr.Madhusudhan Operating from same address as others.

¶8

Mr.Madhusudhan M S/o Mr. Muni Kanniah 3. Mrs. Mayuri M W/o Mr. Madhusudhan 4. Ms.Harshini D/o Mr. Madhusudhan Appellants 2 to 4 are residing at No. T1, 243, Brindavan Apartments, 39^th Street, 8^th Sector, K.K. Nagar, Chennai-600 078 … Appellants And The Authorised Officer, Mr. Muniswamy Velayutham, Punjab National Bank Royapettah High Road, Chennai-600 014 … Respondent Counsel for Appellants : Mrs. R. Manimegalai Counsel for Respondent : Mr. Rahul Jain

¶9

¶10

ORDER

¶11

This Appeal is filed against the order passed in IA 2105/2024 in TSA 28/2024 by Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chennai. By the said order, Learned Presiding Officer ordered to maintain status quo subject to Applicants depositing 15% of the amount due within a period of one week and equal sum within 30 days thereafter. As against said order, this Appeal is filed.

¶12

The TSA 28/2024 filed questioning the order passed by Learned CJM, Tiruvallur, is still pending. When TSA is still pending, this Tribunal cannot go into the merits of the case. In the said circumstances, this Tribunal is of the view that the Appeal filed against an Interim Order can be disposed of giving direction to the Learned Presiding Officer, to dispose of the main TSA 28/2024, as expeditiously as possible.

¶13

In this view of the matter, this Appeal is disposed of directing the Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-III, Chennai, to dispose of TSA 28/2024 on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

¶14

¶15

Accordingly, the Appeal in MA(SA) 70/2025 is disposed of. Both the parties shall bear their own costs. All pending IAs, if any, stand closed.

¶16

There shall be an order of status quo for the period of one month from today. Then, it is for Learned Presiding Officer to decide whether to continue and not to continue

¶17

the order of status quo , on the basis of the exigency and

¶18

need.

¶19

[Dictated to Athistamani, PS, in open court, transcribed by her, corrected and signed by me this 21^st of November, 2025]

¶20

[ Justice G. Chandrasekharan] CHAIRPERSON

¶21

Msn Eps Panels rep by its managing partner Mr Madhusudhan Mrs Mayuri and Ms Harshini v. Punjab National Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Msn Eps Panels rep by its managing partner Mr Madhusudhan Mrs Mayuri and Ms Harshini v. Punjab National 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

Similar cases

Rajesh Ek versus South Indian Bank

M/s Mahan Textile Process India (P) Ltd. versus The Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corporation (Tiic) Ltd.

Mrs Dulsierani Lionel versus Smfg India Credit Co. Ltd.

Govindasamy Balasubramaniam versus Indian Overseas Bank

Govindasamy Balasubramaniam versus Indian Overseas Bank

Sreeprakash a P versus State Bank of India