Allowed

Indian Bank v. Sagar Apparels

DRT7 Jul 2025OA/482/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In IA No. 1414/2025, the Debts Recovery Tribunal addressed an interim application for attachment of property belonging to the 4th defendant. The Tribunal directed the defendant to furnish security within 15 days, alternatively ordering conditional attachment of the specified property to secure the bank's claim of approximately Rs. 4.53 crores pending disposal.

What did the court decide?

Direction to 4th defendant to furnish security within 15 days or face attachment of specified property; conditional attachment of IA schedule property ordered.

Indian Bank versus Sagar Apparels — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IA 1414/25 in OA 482/2025

¶2

07.07.2025

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 07^th day of July, 2025

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

I.A. No.1414 of 2025 in O.A. No. 482 of 2025

¶8

Indian Bank

¶9

Rep. by its Chief Manager Stressed Assets Management Branch, Chennai 2^nd Floor, Wellington Estate 55, Ethiraj Salai Egmore, Chennai – 600 008

¶10

….Applicant

¶11

-Vs-

¶12

M/s Sagar Apparels

¶13

Represented by its Proprietrix Mrs. S. Ajitha No.11A/24A, Pillaiyar Koil Street

¶14

Anakaputhur, Chennai – 600 070

¶15

M/s Maran Garments Represented by its Proprietor Mr. A. Sekar No.44, Thatchar Street

¶16

Kundrathur, Chennai – 600 069

¶17

M/s D. Fashion Represented by its Proprietor Mr.K. Kanagavel No.11A/24A, Pillaiyar Koil Street Anakaputhur, Chennai – 600 070

¶18

S. Ajitha W/o A. Sekar No.58, 2^nd Cross Street Udhayam Nagar, Kundrathur Chennai – 600 069

¶19

A. Sekar

¶20

S/o Ayyadurai No.58, 2^nd Cross Street Udhayam Nagar, Kundrathur Chennai – 600 069

¶21

K. Kanagavel S/o Mr. Kumar No.59, 2^nd Cross Street

¶22

IA 1414/25 in OA 482/2025

¶23

07.07.2025

¶24

¶25

Udhayam Nagar, Kundrathur Chennai – 600 069 …..Defendants

¶26

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶27

Counsel for Applicant : M/s S. Saravana Prakash

¶28

: - ORDER ON IA NO.1414 of 2025- :

¶29

The Original Application is filed by the Applicant Bank against the Defendants, seeking for recovery of money due from Defendants jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.4,53,69,354.53p (Rupees Four Crores Fifty Three Lakhs Sixty Nine Thousand Three Hundred and Fifty Four and Fifty Three paise only) due as on 05.04.2024 together with further interest and costs.

¶30

The Applicant Bank has filed the present petition i.e., I.A.No.1414/2025 with affidavit of the Chief Manager of applicant bank, Sh. Naresh Kumar Parida, seeking for an order of attachment in respect of the property in the name of the 4^th defendant morefully detailed in the schedule to the petition, pending disposal of the above OA.

¶31

It is the case of Applicant that the 1^st Defendant, is a Proprietary concern, represented by its Proprietrix 4^th defendant, 2^nd defendant represented by its Proprietor, 5^th defendant, availed various credit facilities from the applicant bank for their business purpose and executed loan and security documents in favour of the applicant bank. Loan is secured by mortgage by deposit of title deeds of the immovable

¶32

IA 1414/25 in OA 482/2025

¶33

¶34

07.07.2025

¶35

properties morefully detailed in the schedule to OA, belonging to 4^th and 5^th defendants.

¶36

It is further submitted by applicant that due to default in operating the loan accounts, it was classified as NPA on 31.05.2022. Inspite of repeated requests and demands made by the applicant bank, defendants failed to repay the loan amount. Hence the present OA is filed for recovery of sum of Rs.4,53,69,354.53p with further interest and costs.

¶37

It is submitted by applicant bank that property belonging to 4^th defendant, morefully detailed in schedule to IA, by virtue of Sale Deed dated 29.04.1999 registered as Document No.2035/1999 at SRO, Kundrathur, had already been extended as security for the loan availed by M/s YRS Garments by executing Supplemental Memorandum of Deposit of title deeds dated 06.04.2016 in favour of Indian Bank, George Town Branch, registered as Document No.5124/2016 and Document No.11303/2016 at SRO, Kundrathur dated 20.07.2016. However, the said loan facility was closed by the borrower under OTS.

¶38

It is further submitted by applicant bank that the discharge receipt has not been executed as on date by the applicant bank for the above loan facility of M/s YRS Garments. In the agreement of guarantee executed by the 4^th defendant, she had agreed that “so loan as any money remains owing under this guarantee, the bank shall have a lien on all moneys standing to the credit of the guarantor and on any securities

¶39

IA 1414/25 in OA 482/2025

¶40

07.07.2025

¶41

¶42

or goods in the hands of the bank belonging to the guarantor under its control” . It is further agreed in Clause 24 of the Agreement for Open Cash Credit that “the bank may hold all securities belonging to the borrower which may now be in the bank’s possession or which may at any time hereinafter comes into bank’s possession and the proceeds thereof respectively nor only for the specific advance made thereon but also as collateral security for any other monies now due or which may at any time be due from the borrower to the bank whether singly or jointly with another or others.”

¶43

It is submitted by the applicant bank that in order to defeat the recovery process of the applicant bank, there is every possibility for the defendants to liquidate the assets standing in their name and escape from the clutches of liability. Hence the present application is filed to pass an order of attachment before judgment of the petition schedule mentioned property, till the disposal of the OA.

¶44

Heard the counsel for applicant bank and perused the records of produced along with the IA.

¶45

The Applicant Bank has filed the above I.A. on the premise that 4^th defendant may alienate or dispose of or create third-party interest on the properties morefully described in the schedule to the IA.

¶46

It is a matter of record that the OA was filed for recovery of sum of Rs.4,53,69,354.53p which is a colossal sum of money. Considering the

¶47

IA 1414/25 in OA 482/2025

¶48

07.07.2025

¶49

¶50

amount of claim involved in this case and the balance of convenience, the present IA is to be allowed by keeping open the merits of the case and without prejudice to the rights of both the parties. By doing so, no prejudice, no harm and loss will be caused to the Defendants.

¶51

10. As per Section 19 (13)(A) of RDB Act,

¶52

“ Where, at any stage of the proceedings, [the Tribunal on

¶53

an application made by the applicant along with particulars of property to be attached and estimated value thereof, or otherwise is satisfied] that the defendant, with intent to obstruct or delay or frustrate the execution of any order for the recovery of debt that may be passed against him

¶54

(i)is about to dispose of the whole or any part of his property; or

¶55

(ii)is about to remove the whole or any part of the property from the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal; or

¶56

(iii)is likely to cause any damage or mischief to the property or affect its value by misuse or creating third party interest,

¶57

the Tribunal may direct the defendant, within a time to be fixed by it, either to furnish security, in such sum as may be specified

¶58

in the order, to produce and place at the disposal of the Tribunal, when required, the said property or the value of the same, or such portion thereof as may be sufficient to satisfy the

¶59

IA 1414/25 in OA 482/2025

¶60

07.07.2025

¶61

¶62

certificate for the recovery of debt, or to appear and show cause why he should not furnish security.

¶63

(B)Where the defendant fails to show cause why he should not furnish security, or fails to furnish the security required, within the time fixed by the Tribunal, the Tribunal may order the attachment of the whole or such portion of the properties claimed by the applicant as the properties secured in his favour or otherwise owned by the defendant as appears sufficient to satisfy any certificate for the recovery of debt.”

¶64

As the Applicant Bank has prima facie established the essential ingredients for granting an order of temporary injunction restraining the 4^th defendant in respect of the property mentioned in the schedule to the petition, this Tribunal proceeds to pass the following order:

¶65

:ORDER:

¶66

In the circumstances pleaded, 4^th defendant is hereby directed to show cause as to why he should not furnish security to the extent of her liability within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which to attach the IA schedule mentioned properties to answer the OA claim herein.

¶67

Meanwhile, conditional attachment of the petition schedule mentioned property is ordered to secure the dues of the applicant bank.

¶68

IA 1414/25 in OA 482/2025

¶69

07.07.2025

¶70

¶71

The Registry is directed to communicate this Order to the Concerned Sub Registrar Office/ Village Officer for necessary action and for records.

¶72

IA Schedule property shall form part of this order.

¶73

Sd/-

¶74

(S.V. GOWRAMMA)

¶75

PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

¶76

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 07^th day of July, 2025)

¶77

:- SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY -:

¶78

All that piece and parcel of vacant nanjai land measuring an extent of 1800 Sq. ft. comprised in Survey No.52 bearing Door No.66 at Venkatapuram Village, situated at Sriperumbudur Revenue Taluk, Kanchipuram District and lying within the Sub-Registration District of Kundrathur and Registration District of Chennai – South

¶79

Bounded on :-

¶80

East and South of 20 Fee Road

¶81

North of Nanjai land belongs to Mr. Muthu Mudaliar

¶82

West of Plot sold to Muthu

¶83

In all admeasuring :-

¶84

East to West 30 Feet

¶85

North to South 60 Feet

¶86

Sd/-

¶87

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

Indian Bank v. Sagar Apparels

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Sagar Apparels

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus John Kennedy

Indian Bank versus Saraswathe Printing World

Eliyaas versus State Bank of India

Canara Bank versus M/S Maarvel Homes

State Bank of India versus Jithendra

State Bank of India versus Rajeswari