Disposed

Bank of India v. Ms Jcr Traders

DRT20 Sept 2023TA/1887/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In TA No. 1887 of 2023, the Debts Recovery Tribunal Chennai disposed of an application filed by the Bank of India for debt recovery. The court observed that the defendants had approached the bank for a settlement under the One Time Settlement (OTS) scheme, which was accepted, and a sum of Rs.10 Lakhs was remitted as full and final settlement.

What did the court decide?

The application was allowed as settled out of court with a paid sum of Rs.10 Lakhs; costs were not ordered; refund of court fee directed.

Bank of India versus Ms Jcr Traders — Money Laundering | DRT (2023)

¶1

¶2

TA No. 1887 of 2023 20.09.2023

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 20^th day of September, 2023

¶5

Present: Shri Ganapathi K.R.K. Presiding Officer

¶6

TRANSFERRED APPLICATION No. 1887 of 2023

¶7

M/s.Bank of India,

¶8

KK Nagar Branch,

¶9

Plot No.456, Sir R K Shanmugham Road,

¶10

KK Nagar,

¶11

Chennai – 600 078. ….Applicant

¶12

¶13

M/s.JCR Traders,

¶14

Rep. by its Partners

¶15

Mr.B.Jai Kumar Christhu Rajan and

¶16

Mrs.Saranya Jai Kumar,

¶17

Jeppiar Cement Private Limited,

¶18

No.19, Venkatamman,

¶19

St. Bishop Garderns,

¶20

R A Puram, Chennai – 600 028.

¶21

Mr.B.Jai Kumar Christhu Rajan, S/o.Mr.Babu Manoharan,

¶22

No.56 C, Rajeev Gandhi Road, Sholinganallur, Chennai – 600 119.

¶23

Mrs.Saranya Jai Kumar, W/o.Mr.B.Jai Kumar Christhu Rajan,

¶24

34, Ranganathan Avenue,

¶25

East Coast Road,

¶26

Uthandi, Chennai – 600 119. ….Defendants

¶27

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶28

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.S.Sathiyanarayanan. Counsel for Defendants : M/s.K.Newlin Frederick.

¶29

ORDER

¶30

This OA is filed by the applicant bank for recovery of a sum of Rs.39,17,875.32p together with future interest and costs.

¶31

¶32

TA No. 1887 of 2023 20.09.2023

¶33

A memo is filed by applicant bank stating therein that during pendency of the above OA, defendants have approached applicant bank for settlement under OTS, which was accepted by applicant bank and accordingly, defendants had remitted a sum of Rs.10 Lakhs on 09.08.2023 towards full and final settlement of the OA claim. Hence, applicant bank prayed that the OA claim may be treated as settled out of Court and also prayed for refund of eligible Court fee.

¶34

Perused. Memo is taken on record. Allowed. In the result, this OA is disposed of as settled out of Court, however without costs. All other interlocutory applications, if any

¶35

pending shall stand closed. Memo is signed by Chief Manager of applicant bank, counsel for applicant bank and defendants. Registry is directed to process refund of Court fee as per extant guidelines.

¶36

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 20^th day of September, 2023)

¶37

Sd/- (GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of India v. Ms Jcr Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Ms Jcr Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Central Bank of India versus M S Kanchi Kamakoti Peetam & Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Sciences Health Medical Education and Research Foundation

Bank of India versus Ms Saaqib Leather Industry

P Prathap Chandran versus Canara Bank

Idbi Bank versus Srinivasan

Canara Bank versus M/S Jai Fortune Bakers

Canara Bank versus Mumtaj Begum