Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. Orrfit Ortho Aids Chennai Private Limited

DRT19 Sept 2025MA/255/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application for condonation of delay of 133 days in re-presenting an Original Application, relying on the view that financial institutions are custodians of public money, and directed payment of costs.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay of 133 days allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs. 1,000/- to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Orrfit Ortho Aids Chennai Private… — 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.255 of 2025 in OA Dy. No.1354/2024

¶6

Indian Overseas Bank Ashok Nagar Branch Re. by its Chief Manager No.9, Dr. Natesan Road, Ashok Nagar, Chennai – 600 083. ...Applicant

¶7

-Vs-

¶8

M/s Orrfit Ortho Aids Chennai Private Limited Rep. by its Directors Registered Office: Door No. 3, Plot No.22, Ramalinga Adigalar Street, Muthulakshmi Nagar, Chitlpakkam, Chennai – 600 064.

¶9

Also At M/s Orrfit Ortho Aids Chennai Private Limited Plot No. 8, Kathirvel Nagar, (behind A.R. Weight Bridge) Kundrathur Road, Kundrathur, Chennai – 600 069.

¶10

Dr. P.V. Ramesh, S/o. P. Venkatesan, Vijaya Ploy Clinic, No.217, Gandhi Road, Kallakurichi – 606 202.

¶11

Mr. K. Jagannathan, S/o. Kesavan C/o. Ohmm Mahaganapathi Garments, No. 24, 2^nd Floor, Chitlapakkam 2^nd Main Road, Chitlapakkam, Chennai – 600 064.

¶12

¶13

Mr. P. Sankar, S/o. P. Prakasam, No. 691/2, Leelavathi Nagar, Senneerkuppam, Poonamallee, Chennai – 600 056.

¶14

Mr. P.V. Suresh, S/o. P. Venkatesan, No. 217, Gandhi Road, Kallakurichi – 606 202.

¶15

Mr. P.V. Mahesh S/o. P. Venkatesan No. 4/, Gandhi Road,

¶16

Kallakurichi – 606 202. ….Defendants

¶17

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶18

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. Annal P

¶19

ORDER IN MA No. 255/2025

¶20

MA No. 255 of 2025 is taken up. This is an application filed by applicant bank for condonation of delay of 133 days in re-presenting the OA.

¶21

Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank.

¶22

It is submitted by applicant bank that the present OA was filed for

¶23

recovery of sum of Rs.51,41,213.93p together with interest and costs. As some of the loan documents were misplaced, which were traced out only at a later point of time, 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 133 days in representing the OA.

¶24

Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank and the records of the case.

¶25

¶26

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 Hon’ble High Court of Madras (At Madurai) in the judgment of V.P. Rajula -Vs.- K.J. Sakadeva Raja reported in LAWS (MAD)2020-8-441 feels it apt to condone the delay and give opportunity to applicant to prosecute their case.

¶27

Accordingly, MA No.255/25 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 08.10.2025 by the applicant and to file the compliance report before the Registry.

¶28

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.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

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

¶31

(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)

Indian Overseas Bank v. Orrfit Ortho Aids Chennai Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. Orrfit Ortho Aids Chennai Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

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 M s Mukesh Impex

Punjab National Bank versus Mr K Loganathan