Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. D T Enterprises

DRT3 Mar 2025TA/155/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed a transfer application filed by Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of overdue loans. The tribunal, hearing the matter ex-parte, granted a final order allowing the bank to recover the principal amount with interest from the respondents jointly and severally.

What did the court decide?

Order allowed; recovery of Rs. 1,15,71,718/- with interest; liberty to recover by sale of mortgaged property; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

Bank of Maharashtra versus D T Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

TA No.155/2023 (E)

¶2

03.03.2025

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 03^rd day of March, 2025

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

TRANSFER APPLICATION No. 155 of 2023

¶8

Bank of Maharashtra Represented by its Authorized Signatory, Mr. Surndra R Deokar, having office at Sivagnanam Road, T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. ….Applicant

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

D. T. Enterprises A proprietorship concern

¶11

Represented by its Proprietor

¶12

D. Ravikrishnan, Carrying on business at

¶13

No. 166/1, Great Cotton Road, Tuticorin – 628 001.

¶14

D. Ravikrishnan,

¶15

S/o. Natarajan Dhanasekaran, No. 142, Muniyasamypuram 2^nd Street, Tuticorin – 628 003.

¶16

D. Kannan, S/o. Natarajan Dhanasekaran, No. 27C, Muniyasamypuram 2^nd Street, Tuticorin – 628 003. …..Defendants

¶17

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶18

Counsel for Applicant : M/s Shree Law Associates

¶19

Defendants were set ex-parte on 27.07.2021.

¶20

: - FINAL ORDER -:

¶21

This original application is filed on 03.09.2019 by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of

¶22

Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993) against the defendants1

¶23

TA No.155/2023 (E)

¶24

¶25

03.03.2025

¶26

and 2 jointly and severally, for recovery of a total sum of Rs.1,15,71,718/- (Rupees

¶27

One Crore Fifteen Lakhs Seventy-One Thousand Seven Hundred Eighteen) due in respect of Credit Facilities (Loan A/c No.20118902247) together with interest at

¶28

the rate of 12.7% per annum, for slae of schedule mentioned immovable property and for the cost of this application.

¶29

Originally the application was filed before DRT-II, Chennai, assigned OA No.837/2019, and thereafter in pursuance to the notification from Ministry of Finance, DFS, dated 04.10.2022, OA No. 837/2019 stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.155/2023.

¶30

Brief Facts of the case:

¶31

The Applicant submits that the application is filed within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 24 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Tribunal.

¶32

The applicant bank states that the 1^st Defendant, a proprietorship concern represented by the 2^nd Defendant, applied for financial assistance, seeking Cash Credit as Import Letter of Credit of Rs.60.00 lakhs and an Inland Letter of Credit of Rs.40.00 lakhs to meet its working capital requirements.

¶33

It is submitted that upon request of defendants, the applicant bank had sanctioned the Loan.

¶34

The applicant bank submits that the 3^rd Defendant guaranteed the repayment of the facilities granted to the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants and executed two deeds of guarantee for all such facilities on 12.02.2016.

¶35

TA No.155/2023 (E)

¶36

¶37

03.03.2025

¶38

It is submitted by the applicant bank that on availing the said credit facility, the

¶39

2^nd defendant for himself and on behalf of the 1^st defendant have executed the following loan documents on 12.02.2016.

¶40

a) The Demand Promissory Note for Rs.60,00,000/-

¶41

b) The Demand Promissory Note for Rs.40,00,000/-

¶42

c) Deed of Guarantee executed against import letter of credit

¶43

d) Deed of Guarantee executed against Inland Letter of Credit.

¶44

e) Agreement relating to opening of an irrevocable without recourse inland letter of credit.

¶45

d) Agreement relating to opening of an irrevocable without recourse Import letter of credit.

¶46

f) Deed of hypothecation of all facilities against import letter of credit.

¶47

g) Deed of hypothecation of all facilities against inland letter of credit.

¶48

It is submitted that the 2^nd Defendant handed over the title deeds of the

¶49

schedule-mentioned property to the applicant bank with the intent to create a mortgage. Subsequently, on 16.02.2016, the 2^nd Defendant, for himself and on behalf of the 1^st Defendant, executed a mortgagor’s letter confirming the equitable mortgage.

¶50

It is submitted that the 2^nd defendant for himself and on behalf of the 1^st defendant requested for renewal of the cash credit facilities for Rs.60,00,000/- as Foreign Letter of credit and Rs.40,00,000/- as cash credit.

¶51

TA No.155/2023 (E)

¶52

03.03.2025

¶53

¶54

It is submitted that the defendants confirmed the balance and securities regarding the cash credit to the tune of Rs.99,71,924,67/- thereby acknowledging the debt.

¶55

The Applicant Bank submitted that the Defendants, after availing the sanctioned credit facilities, violated the terms of the sanction, including the repayment schedule as a result, the loan account was classified as a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 01.07.2018. Therefore, the Applicant Bank has filed this Original Application (OA) seeking recovery of the outstanding dues from the Defendants.

¶56

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the defendants through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due. Summons to D1 was duly served, whereas summons sent to D2 and D3 were returned unserved with postal endorsement as ‘Left’. Applicant bank had caused paper publication and filed proof thereof. When OA was taken up on 27.07.2021 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendant. Hence, defendants were placed ex-parte on 27.07.2021.

¶57

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶58

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Sri. Sharad Kumar Sinha, Authorized Signatory of the applicant bank, has filed his Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW-1 and list of documents came to be marked as Ex A1 to A17 . As the defendants remained ex-parte, the OA claim remains unchallenged. There is no contra evidence available on record to repudiate the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶59

TA No.155/2023 (E)

¶60

03.03.2025

¶61

¶62

With regard to the amount due to the applicant bank, the interest applied, the conduct and operations in the account and the default committed, this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled for a final order on the following terms:

¶63

: O R D E R:

¶64

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶65

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from Defendants No.1, 2 and 3 jointly, severally a sum of Rs.1,15,71,718/- (One crore fifteen lakh seventyone thousand seven hundred eighteen rupees) due in respect of Credit Facilities together with further interest @ 12.7% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till the date of realization.

¶66

(b) In the event of failure of the defendants to pay the aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of the mortgaged property morefully detailed in the schedule to OA;

¶67

¶68

(d) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the defendants duly considering the amounts, if any, paid by the defendants and/or amount realized by sale of assets etc., during the intervening period after the filing of the OA, enabling the Registry to prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by defendants to the applicant bank.

¶69

(e) The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the

¶70

TA No.155/2023 (E)

¶71

03.03.2025

¶72

¶73

date of this final order.

¶74

(f) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery

¶75

Officer in terms of the final order.

¶76

A copy of this order be communicated to the parties concerned.

¶77

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

¶78

(Dictated to Prasobh Sankar, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 03^rd day of March, 2025)

¶79

ANNEXURES

¶80

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶81

AW-1: Sri. Sharad Kumar Sinha, Authorized Signatory of the applicant bank.

¶82

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶83

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1	BoardResolutiondated21.12.2015	A-1
2	Demand promissory note for Rs. 60,00,000 dated 12.02.2016	A-2
3	Demand promissory note for Rs. 40,00,000 dated 12.02.2016	A-3
4	Deed of guarantee executed against Import Letter of Credit dated12.02.2016	A-4
5	Deed of Guarantee executed against Inland Letter of Credit dated12.02.2016	A-5
6	Agreement relating to opening of an irrevocable without recourse inland letter of credit (40,00,000) dated 12.02.2016	A-6
7	Agreement relating to opening of an irrevocable without recourse inland letter of credit (60,00,000) dated 12.02.2016	A-7
8	Deed of Hypothecation of al facilities against Import letterofcredit dated12.02.2016	A-8
9	Deed of Hypothecation of al facilities against Inland letter ofcredit dated12.02.2016	A-9

¶84

TA No.155/2023 (E)

¶85

03.03.2025

¶86

¶87

10	Letter of confirmation of Equitable Mortgage for Additional/ Enhanced Facilities against document No. 2806/1996 dated16.02.2016	A-10
11	Letter of confirmation of Equitable Mortgage for Additional / Enhanced Facilities against document No. 741/2004dated16.02.2016	A-11
12	Supplemental Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds DocNo.539/16 dated22.02.2016	A-12
13	SettlementDeed (741/2004) dated17.03.2004	A-13
14	Letter of sanctioning Renewal of letters of Credit dated 19.08.2017	A-14
15	Letter of Acknowledging Debt by Defendant 1 dated 27.07.2018	A-15
16	Letter of Acknowledging Debt by Defendant 2 dated 27.07.2018	A-16
17	Account ofStatements dated22.08.2019	A-17

¶88

Witness Examined for the Defendant: -Nil-

¶89

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

¶90

SCHEDULE A

¶91

Item No. 1

¶92

All those piece and parcels of land situated of land situated being and lying at village Meelavittan, Sub registration District: Tuticorin Melur and Registration District: Tuticorin bearing Plot No. 60, Admeasuring 5.509 Cents (2400 Sq. Ft.,) and bearing Survey No. 565, 567 A/1, 566/2 and 567 A/2B and bounded as follows that is to say

¶93

On the North: By Plot No. 39 On the South: By North South 30ft Breadth East West Common Road On the East : By East west 30 ft breadth North South Common Road On the West: By Plot No.59

¶94

Together with building constructed and to be constructed there on bearing 1D/298 V.M.S. Nagar with electrical light fittings and fixtures lying, bearing there on.

¶95

TA No.155/2023 (E)

03.03.2025

Item No. 2

Bounded:

On the East by building of D Kannan bearing door no. 165 with western common wall On the west by Gopslsamy vahaiyara and Kuppusamy Naidu buildings bearing door No 167 and 167/A

¶101

On the north by East west Great Cotton Road

¶102

On the South by East West Periera Lane

¶103

Measuring

¶104

East West on the North 14 1/2ft on the South 14 1/2ft

¶105

North South on the West 77 1/2ft on the East 77 1/2ft

¶106

Totalling to 1123.75 sq.ft of land i.e; 2.58 cents of land with Mattappa building bearing door No. 166, 166/1 and Pereira Lane Door No. 4/1 building with Electrical light fittings and fixtures there on.

¶107

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

Bank of Maharashtra v. D T Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. D T Enterprises

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

Bank of India versus Gokulakrishnan

Indian Bank versus Mrs Poornima M Reddy And Other

Saminathan versus Bank of Baroda

S Vidyakaran versus Repco Home Finance Limited

State Bank of India versus M/S Pallava Buildcon

V Chitra and others versus M S Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company