Disposed

Thenmozhi Furniture v. Jana Small Finance Bank Limited

DRT11 Jul 2024SA/496/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal condoned the delay in presenting the Special Application but disposed of the application as infructuous because the order directing possession had already been executed by the bank. The Tribunal could not direct the bank to restore possession but directed it to hand over inventory items if approached.

What did the court decide?

SA disposed as infructuous; bank directed to hand over inventory items if approached within 10 days; bank requested to consider settlement.

Thenmozhi Furniture versus Jana Small Finance Bank Limited — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

SA No. 496 of 2024

11.07.2024

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 11^th day of July, 2024

¶6

Present: SHRI A. S. JAYACHANDRA Presiding Officer (In – charge)

¶7

SARFAESI APPLICATION No.496 of 2024 (SA Dy. No.4939/2023)

¶8

M/s. Thenmozhi Furniture Rep. by its Prop. Mrs. Vanitha

¶9

Mrs. S. Vanitha W/o. Santhanam

¶10

Mr. Santhanam S/o. R. Ramachandran

¶11

Mr. Sriamulu S/o. Nandagopal

¶12

1 to 4 are residing at: No.2/33, K.C. Garden 6^th Street, Peravallur, Jawahar Nagar, Chennai – 600 082. ….Applicants -VsThe Authorized Officer, M/s. Jana Small Finance Bank Limited 11/2 & 12/2B off Domlur, Koramangala, Inner Ring Road, Next to Embassy Golf Links, Branch Office Address: No.28/36, First Floor, South West Boag Road, T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. ….Defendant Counsels on record / appeared:

¶13

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. D. Bharathy Counsel for Respondent : Ms. Kalaivani for M/s. V. Balasubramani

SA No. 496 of 2024

11.07.2024

PROCEEDINGS DATED 11.07.2024

¶18

This unnumbered SA is placed by the Registrar before the Bench for deciding on maintainability of SA on the question of limitation and praying to condone delay of 3 days in re-presenting. The delay is condoned. SA may be numbered.

¶19

Heard the Ld.Counsel on both the sides.

¶20

There is no application for stay. The Ld. Counsel Smt. Susheela submits that her client is ready to deposit 25% of the amount due and with that condition - compliance, her clients be put back into the possession.

¶21

The SA challenges the orders of the Ld. CMM, Egmore in CMP No.2231/2022 dated 16.03.2023.

¶22

The defendant bank was served with the notices and the detailed counter is also filed. The Ld. Counsel for the bank submits that there is no application for stay or for any interim prayer much less the oral submissions made for restoration of possession. It is also submitted that the bank had already taken possession pursuant to the orders of the Ld. CMM on 01.06.2024 since there was no stay.

¶23

It is to be noted that the oral submission to direct the bank as a mandate to put

¶24

the back into possession while the SA is pending cannot be passed since the law does not permit and this Tribunal is only a creature of statute. There is no provision of law, the same cannot be exercised as an inherent power since the tribunal has no such

powers

SA No. 496 of 2024

11.07.2024

It is seen that the orders of Ld. CMM having been duly executed, the prayer in the SA becomes infructuous. Therefore, the SA itself is not maintainable, without any much deliberation concerning the counter filed by the bank. It is also submitted by the applicants that certain articles/goods belonging to the applicants and their tenants are locked up while the possession was taken pursuant to the orders of the Ld. CMM. The Ld. Counsel for the bank submits that an inventory is also prepared. A copy of the inventory be shared with the Ld. Counsel for the applicants.

¶30

However, at this stage, the Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that her client is willing to deposit 25% of the amount due for avoiding the future consequences. This Tribunal cannot direct the defendant bank. It is always open for the defendant bank to consider the request of its customer / the applicants in accordance with the banking policy. Suffice it to say that the SA is not maintainable in view of the prayers becoming infructuous. Hence, the same stands disposed of by the following orders.

¶31

ORDER

¶32

This unnumbered SA be numbered and the same stands disposed of as becoming infructuous. However, the defendant bank is directed to hand over the articles as depicted in the Inventory to if the applicants approach the bank within 10 days.

¶33

At the same time, the defendant bank is requested to consider the plea of the applicants to settle the accounts either by accepting a plan for repayment or by OTS if eligible. The Ld. Counsel for the defendant bank fairly submitted that she would ask her

SA No. 496 of 2024

11.07.2024

clients to desist from proceeding further in the matter for a period of 30 days from today

¶38

so that any amicable settlement to emerge within the banking policy guidelines

¶39

With these observations, the SA stands disposed of.

¶40

A copy of this order be given free of cost to both these counsel.

¶41

Sd/(A.S. JAYACHANDRA) PRESIDING OFFICER (In-charge)

Thenmozhi Furniture v. Jana Small Finance Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thenmozhi Furniture v. Jana Small Finance Bank Limited

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Quickee Infra Pvt. Ltd.

vijay krishna versus Indian Bank

Mrs Mahalakshmi versus Murugan

Bank of Baroda (Vijaya Bank) versus Valli

R S Manufacturing versus Idbi Bank

Canara Bank versus Durairaj