Allowed

Idbi Bank v. M/S R P Usha Enterprises

DRT19 Feb 2025MA/59/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Misc. Application MA 59/24, IDBI Bank Limited, a financial institution, sought restoration of its trial application dismissed for non-prosecution. The Tribunal allowed the application on the condition that the bank pays costs and complies within specified deadlines, granting it a last opportunity to adduce evidence.

What did the court decide?

Restoration of the Trial Application (TA) on payment of costs of Rs.30,000/- to the DRT and DRAT Bar Association and filing a compliance report.

Idbi Bank versus M/S R P Usha Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

MA 59/24 in TA No.1480/2023

¶2

19.02.2025

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 19^th day of February, 2025

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA

¶7

Presiding Officer

¶8

Misc. Application Nos. 59/24 in

¶9

TA No.1480 of 2023

¶10

IDBI Bank Limited Regional Office at P.M. Towers, First Floor No.37, Greams Road Chennai – 600 006

¶11

And one of its Zonal offices at 115, Anna Salai, Saidapet Chennai – 600 015 Rep. by its Deputy General Manager

¶12

….Petitioner / Applicant

¶13

-Vs-

¶14

M/s. R.P. Usha Enterprises

¶15

Rep. by its Managing Partner, Shri R. Parthiban Having its office at No.39, Ward No.108 Habibullah Salai,

¶16

T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017

¶17

Shri R. Parthiban S/o Late K.A. Rishikesavan

¶18

No.39, Ward No.108

¶19

Habibullah Salai

¶20

T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017

¶21

Smt. P. Usha W/o Shri R. Parthiban No.39, Ward No.108 Habibullah Salai

¶22

T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017

¶23

Shri R.P. Rajarajan No.39, Ward No.108 Habibullah Salai

¶24

T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017 .….Respondents/Defendants

¶25

MA 59/24 in TA No.1480/2023

¶26

¶27

19.02.2025

¶28

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶29

Counsel for Applicant : M/s E. Hariharan :- ORDER ON MA NO. 59/24 -:

¶30

MA 59/24 is filed by applicant bank praying to restore TA, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 09.02.2024.

¶31

The Original Application is filed by the Petitioner/Applicant Bank against the Defendants, seeking main relief to order the Defendants pay a sum of Rs.15,13,48,721/- (Rupees Fifteen Crores Thirteen Lakhs Forty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty One only) together with future interest and costs.

¶32

The Applicant Bank has filed the present petition i.e., MA No. 59/24 along with affidavit of Sh. Naveen Kumar Agarwal, DGM – Retail Recovery of applicant bank seeking to restore TA, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 09.02.2024.

¶33

It is submitted by applicant bank that it was given to understand by the earlier counsel that proof affidavit was already filed and the case is ready for marking of documents. However, when counsel’s junior had verified the stage, it was found that PA was still under return. As original documents in respect of the schedule property were destroyed in a fire accident, bank was preparing applicants to let in secondary evidence. However, as junior counsel’s father was ill, she could not continue to follow up the case. Applicant bank had taken all the steps to process the applications and bring on record. Thus submitting, counsel prayed for restoration of TA.

¶34

MA 59/24 in TA No.1480/2023

¶35

¶36

19.02.2025

¶37

Heard and perused the records of the case .

¶38

The applicant, being a financial institution has filed the present restoration petition for recovery of a sum of Rs.15,13,48,721/- along with interest and for sale of mortgaged properties. It is seen that the applicant has not re-present the PA and OD despite availing substantial adjournments. Accordingly, TA came to be dismissed for default and non-prosecution on 09.02.2024.

¶39

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 restore the TA and give last opportunity to applicant to adduce their evidence along with documents.

¶40

Accordingly, MA 59/24 stands allowed subject to payment of costs of Rs.30,000/- to the DRT and DRAT Bar Association, Chennai on or before 03.03.2025 by the applicant bank and to file the payment of compliance report before the Registrar Court on 06.03.2025.

¶41

It is clarified that in case if the applicant bank fails to comply with the conditional order above, MA stands dismissed automatically without there being any need to pass separate order.

¶42

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

¶43

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 19^th day of February, 2025)

Idbi Bank v. M/S R P Usha Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank v. M/S R P Usha Enterprises

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

A Dheepa versus Axis Bank

State Bank of India versus Seetharaman

Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Private Limited versus M/S Shristi Construction Quipments

Union Bank of India versus Veeravel

Canara Bank versus M s Reach Telecommunications Pvt. Ltd.

K M Ganesan versus Bank of Baroda