Dismissed

Sri Venkatachalapathy modern rice mill rep by its partner B Navakumar and others v. Idbi Bank

DRT10 Mar 2025SA/705/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal disposed of a SARFAESI application as settled. The applicants withdrew the challenge to the auction sale after paying the conditional amount and negotiating an Offset to Settlement (OTS) proposal with the respondent bank.

What did the court decide?

The SARFAESI application was disposed of as settled on the withdrawal of the application by the applicants.

Sri Venkatachalapathy modern rice mill rep by its partner B… — Company and Corporate | DRT (2025)

SA No.705/2024

10.03.2025

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 10^th day of March, 2025

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA

¶7

Hon’ble Presiding Officer

¶8

SARFAESI APPLICATION No. 705 of 2024

¶9

Sr. Venkatachalapathy Modern Rice Mill,

¶10

Rep. by its partner B. Navakumar, S/o. Balakrishnan, Old T.N. Palayam, Abishegapakkam, Puducherry- 605 007.

¶11

BNK Modern Rice Mill Private Ltd, Rep by its Managing Director, B. Navakumar, Old T.N. Palayam, Abishegapakkam, Puducherry – 605 007.

¶12

Sri Padmavathi Naveena Arisi Aalai, Rep. by its proprietor, Smt.N. Santha, Old T.N. Palayam, Abishegapakkam, Puducherry – 605 007.

¶13

Jayalakshmi Modern rice Mill, Rep. by its partner B. Navakumar, Old T.N. Palayam, Abishegapakkam, Puducherry – 605 007.

¶14

Sri. Venkatachalapthy stores, Rep. by its proprietor B. Nava Kumar, Old T.N. Palayam, Abishegapakkam, Puducherry – 605 007. --Applicants

¶15

-Vs-

¶16

The Authorized Officer, IDBI Bank Ltd., 115, Anna Salai, Saidapet, Chennai – 610 015. -Respondent

SA No.705/2024

10.03.2025

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶21

Counsel for Applicant : Ld. Counsel Mr. Thiagarajan Counsel for Respondent : Ld. Counsel Mr. Shivakumar & Suresh

¶22

: - ORDER ON SA.No. 705/2024- :

¶23

The applicant challenges the sale notice dated 21.09.2024, fixing the sale to be held on 16.10.2024 for recovery of the debt due amount of Rs. 18,61,82,208.07/-

¶24

Counsel for respondent bank present. None represented the applicant in the I and the II round. The applicants had paid the conditional amount on the date of auction, since the amount was not paid within the time stipulated by this Hon’ble Tribunal, the auction sale was completed.

¶25

Subsequently, the applicant has approached the Respondent bank with proposal for OTS and as such the applicants decided to withdraw this application and instructed their counsel to withdraw this application.

¶26

The said B. Navakumar, partner of the first applicant has signed the memo for himself and on behalf of other applicants along with their counsel appearing for applicants in this case, SA.No.705/2024.

¶27

Memo filed by the applicant is taken on record.

¶28

Accordingly, SA stands disposed of as settled between the parties.

¶29

All the pending IA are disposed off.

¶30

The Respondent counsel have endorsed the same in the proceeding sheet.

SA No.705/2024

10.03.2025

(Dictated to stenographer (MS), after its transcription and necessary corrections, signed and order is passed on this day 10^th day of March 2025.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

S.V. GOWRAMMA PRESIDING OFFICER-DRT III

Sri Venkatachalapathy modern rice mill rep by its partner B Navakumar and others v. Idbi Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Venkatachalapathy modern rice mill rep by its partner B Navakumar and others v. Idbi Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of India versus Poonam

Bank of India versus Jayanthi International

Bank of Baroda versus Velavan Deepak

Krishnamoorthy and Rajalakshmi versus Aptus Value Housing Finance India Limited

Bank of India versus Gopalakrishnan

Rbl Bank Limited versus Mr Dr R Manivannan