Disposed

Indian Bank v. Zubaida Begum a

DRAT11 Jul 2025REGULAR APPEAL/128/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal disposed of based on a joint compromise memo between the Appellant Bank and Respondents 7 and 8 (legal representatives of deceased borrowers) for payment of outstanding dues, despite objections from a guarantor respondent regarding her consent and property rights.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is disposed of in terms of the Joint Compromise Memo dated 09.07.2025; parties to bear their own costs.

Indian Bank versus Zubaida Begum a — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2025)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

¶2

Dated the 11^th of July, 2025

¶3

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

¶4

RA 128/2018

¶5

(OA 327/2001, on the file of DRT- II, Chennai)

¶6

Between

¶7

Indian Bank,

¶8

Asset Recovery Management Branch-II, No.55, Ethiraj Salai, 4^th Floor, (Account transferred from Indian Bank, Guindy Branch. Egmore,Chennai-600 008

¶9

… Appellant

¶10

-Vs-

¶11

Dr.Zubaida Begum, W/o Late Dr.Akthar Hussain, No.55, Triplicane High Road, Chennai -600 005.

¶12

Akthar Hussain

¶13

S/o late Dr. Mazher Hussain, No.55, Triplicane High Road, Chennai -600 005.

¶14

Mrs. Ansari Begum,

¶15

W/o Ahmed Basha,

¶16

NO.113, Choolaimedu High Road

¶17

Chennai -600 094

¶18

¶19

Mrs. Khousar Begum,

¶20

W/o Late J.Syed Shajahan,

¶21

NO.113, Choolaimedu High Road Chennai -600 094

¶22

Mrs. Rasheeda Begum,

¶23

W/o Mr.Abdur Hafiz,

¶24

No.15, Flowers, Street,

¶25

Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.

¶26

Mrs.Noorjahan, W/o Mr.Abdul Basith Khan, No.17/1, Abdul Khader Street, Mount Road, Chennai-600 002.

¶27

Dr. Khalid Hussain, S/o Late Dr. Akthar Hussain,

¶28

No.55, Triplicane High Road,

¶29

Chennai-600 005

¶30

Dr. Sajad Hussain

¶31

S/o Late Dr. Akthar Hussain, No.55, Triplicane High Road, Chennai-600 005

¶32

Counsel for Appellant Bank : Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Jayesh B. Dolia Counsel for Respondent 6 : Mr. T. R. Sundaram Counsel for Respondents 7 and 8 : Mr. S. Sethuraman.

¶33

¶34

ORDER

¶35

The Joint Compromise Memo entered into between the Appellant Bank and they Respondents 7 and 8 is produced and perused.

¶36

It is seen from the Joint Compromise Memo that the Respondents 7 and 8 are the LRs of borrowers namely deceased Respondents 1 and 2. They agreed to pay a sum of Rs.17.10 Crores to the Appellant Bank towards the settlement of outstanding dues in the loan account of their mother late Zubaida Begum. They have already handed over a Demand Draft of Rs.16.10 Crores on 15.07.2025. Upon receipt of Rs.17.10 Crores, the Bank shall return the title deeds and parent documents of the Schedule mentioned properties to them. They are also ready to take physical possession of the property on the basis of “as is where is and as is what is” condition. The LRs of the borrowers undertook not to make any claim against the Bank before any forum in respect to the properties involved in the loan

¶37

¶38

account of Zubaida Begum. Appellant Bank and the LRs of deceased borrowers, agreed to withdraw all the cases, complaints, notices pending in all courts and tribunals. It is prayed that in terms of the above compromise settlement arrived, the Appeal has to be disposed of.

¶39

At the time of filing of Appeal, Respondent No.2 was already dead. During the pendency of the Appeal, it was reported that Respondents 1, 3, 4 and 5 are dead and it is recorded.

¶40

Learned Counsel for Respondent No.6 filed a Memo stating that the aforesaid settlement had been reached between the borrower and the Bank without her knowledge and consent. Respondent No.6 was a guarantor to the loan. Her property which was mortgaged was sold for Rs.4.75 Crors and that amount was also taken into consideration for reaching this settlement. Respondent No.6 already filed SA 129/2018 challenging the sale conducted in respect of her

¶41

¶42

property in SARFAESI proceedings. Her right to challenge the sale should be protected.

¶43

Recording the submission of Learned Counsel for R6, this Tribunal permits the compromise reached between the Bank and the LRs of the borrowers namely Respondents 7 and 8, to be recorded for the disposal of this Appeal in terms of the Joint Compromise Memo. Accordingly this Appeal is disposed of as per the terms of the Joint Compromise Memo dated 09.07.2025 entered into between the Appellant Bank and Respondents 7 and 8.

¶44

The Joint Compromise Memo shall form part of this

¶45

order.

¶46

Parties are directed bear their own costs.

¶47

[Dictated to Athistamani, PS, in open court, transcribed by her, corrected and signed by me this 11^th of July, 2025]

¶48

CHAIRPERSON

¶49

Indian Bank v. Zubaida Begum a

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Zubaida Begum a

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

Aks Cold Storage Limited versus Indian Bank

Thangeswari versus City Union Bank Limited

S S Prakash versus The Mysore Silk Cloth Merchants Co. operative Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus The Royal Bank of Scotland N v and Ors.

R Jagannathan versus Canara Bank

Sixth Sense Robotics and Automations Pvt. Limited versus Bank of Baroda