Allowed

Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Private Limited v. Rajkumar

DRT1 Jul 2023TA/275/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal disposed of an arbitration application filed for recovery of dues. Upon the defendants remitting Rs.90 lakhs under an accepted Timeous Settlement Scheme during the application's pendency, the court allowed the bank's prayer to treat the matter as settled out of court without costs and ordered the return of documents.

What did the court decide?

The OA claim treated as settled out of Court without costs; registry directed to return documents to applicant bank.

Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Private Limited versus Rajkumar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

¶2

TA No. 275 of 2023 01.07.2023

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 01^st day of July, 2023

¶5

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

¶6

TRANSFERRED APPLICATION No. 275 of 2023

¶7

(Originally filed before DRT- II, Chennai as OA No.461 of 2020 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.275 of 2023)

¶8

M/s.Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Company Limited, Rep. by its Manager, Having its Registered Office at: Indiabulls Finance Centre, 9^th Floor, Tower 1, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400 013. ….Applicant

¶9

¶10

Mr.I.Rajkumar, S/o.Mr.Inbaraj, Proprietor of M/s.New Ponnu Super Market, No.12/69, Kamarajar Main Road, New Perungalathur, Chennai – 600 063.

¶11

Also at:

¶12

Mr.I.Rajkumar, S/o.Mr.Inbaraj, Plot No.3, Door No.4, Annai Theresa 4^th Cross Street, New Perungalathur, Chennai – 600 063.

¶13

Mrs.R.Latha, W/o.Mr.I.Rajkumar, Plot No.3, Door No.4, Annai Theresa 4^th Cross Street, New Perungalathur, Chennai – 600 063. ….Defendants

¶14

¶15

TA No. 275 of 2023 01.07.2023

¶16

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶17

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.Ramalingam & Associates. Counsel for Respondent : M/s.V.Parivallal.

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This OA is filed by the applicant bank for recovery of a sum of Rs.98,70,598.48p together with future interest and costs.

¶20

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.90 lakhs 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 return of documents contemplated to be marked as Ex A-2 to Ex A-14.

¶21

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 pending shall stand closed. Registry is directed to return all the documents filed along with proof affidavit to applicant bank under proper acknowledgment as per extant

¶22

guidelines.

¶23

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 01^st day of July, 2023)

¶24

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

Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Private Limited v. Rajkumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Private Limited v. Rajkumar

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

P Sathish Kumar versus Indian Bank

Yes Bank versus M s Kbs Contractor

Canara Bank versus G Ganesan

State Bank of India versus Dhileep Kumar

Icici Bank Limited versus Suresh Paul

Mr v Sathyanarayanan versus Union Bank of India