Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. M s Mukesh Impex

DRT19 Sept 2025MA/248/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application for condonation of delay in re-presenting a Debt Recovery Application, citing the custodial nature of bank funds and the High Court judgment of V.P. Rajula, subject to court fees.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 120 days is condoned, subject to payment of Rs. 1,000 to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority by 07.10.2025 and filing a compliance report.

Punjab National Bank versus M s Mukesh Impex — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶3

Dated this the 19^th day of September 2025

¶4

PRESENT : SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶5

M.A. No.248 of 2025 in OA Dy. No.1160/2022

¶6

Punjab National Bank Zonal Satra Center, PNB Towers, 46-49, Fourth Floor, Royapettah, R.H. Road, Chennai – 600014. Rep. by its Chief Manager C.G. Ranjith. ...Applicant

¶7

-Vs-

¶8

M/s Mukesh Impex Rep. by its Proprietrix Mrs. B. Sasikala, No.44, 18 Kattur Sadayappan Street, Periamet, Chennai – 600003.

¶9

Mrs. B. Sasikala W/o Mr. J. Balasubramanian, 743/5, Duraikulam Shop, Pallapatty Village, Madurai Road, Dindigul – 624 002. Also at Mrs. B. Sasikala W/o Mr. J. Balasubramanian, Flat No. P-301, Purva Swan Lake apartment O.M.R. Road, Kelambakkam, Kancheepuram District, Chennai – 603 103.

¶10

Mr. A. J, Balasubramanian Flat No. P-301, Purva Swan Lake apartment O.M.R. Road, Kelambakkam, Kancheepuram District, Chennai – 603 103 ….Defendants

¶11

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶12

Counsel for Applicant : Mr. G. Jehanathan

¶13

¶14

ORDER IN MA No. 248/2025

¶15

MA No. 248 of 2025 is taken up. This is an application filed by applicant bank for condonation of delay of 120 days in re-presenting the OA.

¶16

Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank.

¶17

It is submitted by applicant bank that the present OA was filed for recovery of sum of Rs.8,48,07,053.32p together with interest and costs. It is submitted that the OA was returned by the Registry on 14.06.2023. Due to inadvertence, during shifting of the counsel’s office, the bundle got misplaced. Further the counsel on record had met with an accident and sustained minor ankle fracture. 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 120 days in representing the OA.

¶18

Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank

¶19

and the records of the case.

¶20

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

¶21

of Hon’ble High Court of Madras (At Madurai) in the judgment of

¶22

V.P. Rajula -Vs.- K.J. Sakadeva Raja reported in LAWS (MAD)-

¶23

2020-8-441 feels it apt to condone the delay and give opportunity to applicant to prosecute their case.

¶24

¶25

Accordingly, MA No.248/25 stands allowed and delay is condoned, subject to payment of cost of Rs.1,000/- to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority on or before 07.10.2025 by the applicant and to file the compliance report before the Registry.

¶26

In case of the applicant complying with the order and filing compliance memo, Registry is directed to number the OA, if otherwise found to be in order. It is clarified that in case if the applicant bank fails to comply with the conditional order above, MA stand dismissed automatically without there being any need to pass separate order.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

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

¶29

(Dictated to Steno (Deepika), transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 19^th day of September, 2025)

Punjab National Bank v. M s Mukesh Impex

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. M s Mukesh Impex

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

Punjab National Bank versus Vinothkumar

Punjab National Bank versus Manikandan

State Bank of India versus Munirathinam

Union Bank of India versus M/S Galaxy Enterprises

Punjab National Bank versus Mr K Loganathan

K Sivakumar versus State Bank of India