Allowed

Icici Bank Limited v. M s P R Engineers And Contractors

DRT22 Aug 2025MA/135/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application for condonation of a 192-day delay in re-filing an Outstanding Affidavit (OA) due to inadvertent mixing of bundles, relying on a prior Madras High Court judgment.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 192 days delay in re-presenting the Outstanding Affidavit allowed subject to payment of Rs. 10,000/-.

Icici Bank Limited versus M s P R Engineers And Contractors — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶3

Dated this the 22^nd day of August 2025

¶4

SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶5

M.A. No.135 of 2025 in OA Dy. No.1438/2022

¶6

ICICI Bank Limited, West Wing. Plot No. 24, South Phase, Industrial Estate, Ambattur, Chennai-600058.

Rep. by J. Vignesh

.... Applicant

-Vs-

M/s. P.R. Engineers And Contractors, a Partnership firm represented by its partners Mr. Vepamanu Yuvaraaj and Mr. Vepamanu Ramulu No. 75, Golden George Nagar, 1ª Floor Ettiyappan Street, Nerkundram Tamil Nadu - Chennai 600 107.

¶11

Also at

¶12

M/s. P.R. Engineers And Contractors, a Partnership firm represented by its partners Mr. Vepamanu Yuvaraaj and Mr. Vepamanu Ramulu D. Vaddipalli, Dakkil Mandalam, Vembuluru, Nellore-Andhra pradesh - 524124.

¶13

Mr. Vepamanu Yuvaraaj, S/o. Vepamanu Narasimhulu, No. 75, Golden George Nagar, 1st Floor Ettiyappan Street, Nerkundram Tamil Nadu - Chennai 600 107.

¶14

Also at

¶15

Mr. Vepamanu Yuvaraaj, S/o. Vepamanu Narasimhulu, Flat no. D-301, 3rd floor, BLOCK -D, LANCOR TCP, Lake Front School Road, Sholinganallur, Tamil nadu - Chennai - 600 119.

¶16

Also at

¶17

Mr. Vepamanu Yuvaraaj, S/o. Vepamanu Narasimhulu, Flat no. F-101, 1^st floor, BLOCK -F, LANCOR TCP, Lake Front School Road, Sholinganallur, Tamil nadu - Chennai - 600 119.

¶18

¶19

Also at

¶20

Mr. Vepamanu Yuvaraaj, S/o. Vepamanu Narasimhulu, Flat no. D-102, 1^st Floor, Block -D, LANCOR TCP, Lake Front School Road, Sholinganallur, Tamil nadu - Chennai - 600 119.

¶21

Mr. Vepamanu Ramulu, S/o. Vepamanu Narasimhulu, No. 75, Golden George Nagar, 1ª Floor Ettiyappan Street, Nerkundram Tamil Nadu - Chennai 600 107.

¶22

Also at

¶23

Mr. Vepamanu Ramulu, S/o. Vepamanu Narasimhulu, Flat no. 202, 2nd Floor, Block -F, LANCOR TCP, Lake Front School Road, Sholinganallur, Tamil Nadu - Chennai - 600 119.

¶24

Also at

¶25

Mr. Vepamanu Ramulu, S/o. Vepamanu Narasimhulu, Flat no. D-301, 3rd floor, BLOCK -D, LANCOR TCP, Lake Front School Road, Sholinganallur, Tamil nadu - Chennai - 600 119.

¶26

Also at

¶27

Mr. Vepamanu Ramulu, S/o. Vepamanu Narasimhulu, Flat no. F-101, 1st Floor, Block -F, LANCOR TCP, Lake Front School Road, Sholinganallur, Tamil nadu - Chennai - 600 119.

¶28

Also at

¶29

Mr. Vepamanu Ramulu, S/o. Vepamanu Narasimhulu, Flat no. D-102, 1st Floor, Block -D, LANCOR TCP, Lake Front School Road, Sholinganallur,

¶30

Tamil Nadu - Chennai - 600 119.

¶31

….Defendants

¶32

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶33

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. S. Suresh

¶34

¶35

ORDER IN MA No. 135/2025

¶36

MA No. 135 of 2025 is taken up. This is an application filed by applicant bank for condonation of delay of 192 days in re-presenting the OA.

¶37

Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank.

¶38

It is submitted by applicant bank that the present OA was filed for recovery of sum of Rs.10,70,57,113.66p together with interest and costs. The OA was returned by the Registry on 19.06.2023. It is submitted that due to inadvertence the case bundle got mixed up along with the disposed bundles, which was traced out at a later point of time. Hence OA could not be re-presented within the time granted by this Tribunal, which is neither wilful nor wanton, but only due to aforesaid reasons. Therefore, the applicant bank prayed for condonation of delay of 192 days in representing the OA.

¶39

As OA is filed for recovery of money due from borrower and in view of the fact that the bank being a financial institution is the custodian of the public money held under trust, the Tribunal relying on the judgment of

¶40

Hon’ble High Court of Madras (At Madurai) in the judgment of V.P. Rajula -Vs.- K.J. Sakadeva Raja reported in LAWS (MAD)-2020-8-

¶41

441 feels it apt to condone the delay and give opportunity to applicant to prosecute their case.

¶42

Accordingly, MA No.79/25 stands allowed and delay is condoned, subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- to the DRT and DRAT Bar Association, Chennai on or before 25.03.2025 by the applicant and to file the compliance report before the Registrar Court on 27.03.2025.

¶43

¶44

In view of the fact that the bank being a financial institution is the custodian of the public money held under trust, the Tribunal feels it apt to condone the delay and give last opportunity to applicant to prosecute their case.

¶45

In the circumstances pleaded, MA stands allowed. Registry is directed to number the OA, if otherwise found to be in order.

¶46

Sd/-

¶47

(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

¶48

(Dictated to Steno (Deepika), transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 22^nd day of August, 2025)

Icici Bank Limited v. M s P R Engineers And Contractors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Bank Limited v. M s P R Engineers And Contractors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

J Rathiga versus Ms Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd.

Mrs Dulsierni Lionel versus Smfg India Credit Formerly M S Fullerton India Credit Company Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Mohamed Ghouse

Dena Bank versus Babu

Bank of Baroda versus Ramesh Ramaswamy

Icici Bank Limited versus S Sarveswaras