Allowed

Bank of Maharashtra v. Suyambulingam

DRT6 May 2025TA/1605/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This decrees a transfer application filed by Bank of Maharashtra for recovery of housing loan dues. The court allowed the claim against the borrower and guarantor ex-parte, directing the bank to recover Rs.24.32 Lakhs principal plus future interest and authorizing sale of the mortgaged property upon failure to pay.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 24,32,851/- with interest at 12.25% p.a., costs of application, and authorization to sell the mortgaged property.

Bank of Maharashtra versus Suyambulingam — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 1605 of 2023

¶2

06.05.2025

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 06^th day of May, 2025

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA

¶7

Presiding Officer

¶8

TRANSFERRED APPLICATION No. 1605 of 2023

¶9

(Originally filed before DRT- II, Chennai as OA 638/2019 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal

¶10

and renumbered as TA No 1605 of 2023)

¶11

Bank of Maharashtra Valmiki Nagar Branch Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai Rep. by its Manager ….Applicant

¶12

-Vs-

¶13

1 Mr. D. Suyambulingam S/o. Mr. Durairaj, No.16/18, Gandhi Nagar, Main Road Extension, Ekkatuthangal,

¶14

Chennai – 600 032

¶15

Mrs. D. Murugalakshmi, W/o. Mr. Durairaj, No.16/18, Gandhi Nagar, Main Road Extension, Ekkatuthangal, Chennai – 600 032 …..Defendants

¶16

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶17

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. N. Sivabalan

¶18

Defendants were set ex-parte on 28.07.2021

¶19

: - FINAL ORDER - :

¶20

This original application is filed on 19.03.2019 by the applicant bank

¶21

under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993) against the defendants jointly and severally for recovery of a total sum of

¶22

T.A. No. 1605 of 2023

¶23

¶24

06.05.2025

¶25

Rs.24,32,851/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs Thirty Two Thousand Eight Hundred & Fifty One Only) due in respect of Housing Loan (A/c No.60133708221) together with further interest @ 12.25%, p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full from the Defendants jointly and severally and for sale of Schedule mentioned immovable property morefully detailed in Schedule to the OA and for costs of this application.

¶26

Originally, this Application was filed before DRT-II, Chennai, assigned OA No.638 of 2019, and thereafter in pursuance to the notification from Ministry of Finance, DFS dated 04.10.2022, OA No. 638 of 2019 stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.1605 of 2023.

¶27

Brief Facts of the case:

¶28

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.

¶29

It is the case of the Applicant Bank that the 1^st Defendant approached

¶30

the Applicant Bank for Sanction of a Housing Loan for Rs.15,00,000/- for Construction of a House at Plot No.9 at Venkateswara Nagar Extension,

¶31

Kalyana Kuppam Road, Ekkadu Village, Tiruvallur Taluk vide loan application dated 18.04.2013. The 2^nd defendant has agreed to stand as a

¶32

T.A. No. 1605 of 2023

¶33

¶34

06.05.2025

¶35

Guarantor for repayment of the Housing Loan.

¶36

It is submitted that the Applicant Bank had duly considered the request of the 1^st Defendant and sanctioned a Housing Loan of Rs.14.60 Lakhs vide sanction intimation letter dated 30.05.2013.

¶37

The Defendants had duly accepted the terms and conditions of the aforesaid sanction. In consideration of and to secure the Housing Loan, the Defendants executed the following documents in favour of the Applicant Bank:

¶38

a. The Defendants executed a request letter dated 30.05.2013 for making credit available.

¶39

b. The 1^st Defendant had on 30.05.2013 executed an on Demand Promissory Note for Rs.14.60 Lakhs.

¶40

c. The 1^st Defendant had executed on 30.05.2013 an agreement for

¶41

Housing loan for Rs.14.60 Lakhs.

¶42

d. The 1^st Defendant executed a on demand promissory note for Rs.14.60 Lakhs.

¶43

e. The 2^nd Defendant on 30.05.2013 had executed a Guarantee Agreement for Rs.14.60 guaranteeing the repayment of the loan availed by the 1^st Defendant.

¶44

f. The defendants had on 30.05.2013 executed a declaration confirming

¶45

the execution of the Demand Promissory Note and the Guarantee Agreement.

¶46

T.A. No. 1605 of 2023

¶47

06.05.2025

¶48

¶49

g. The 1^st Defendant on 29.05.2013 executed a declaration for proposed equitable mortgage.

¶50

h. The 1^st Defendant on 04.06.2013 executed a Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deed confirming the deposit of title deeds made on 03.05.2013 and the same is registered as Document No.7474 of 2013 in the file of the Sub-Registrar, Tiruvallur.

¶51

It is submitted by Applicant Bank that after availing the said facility, the defendants deliberately failed to repay the loan amount availed in spite of repeated demands and reminders by Applicant Bank. As defendants miserably failed to make repayments in the aforesaid loan account, the applicant bank classified the aforesaid loan account as NPA (Non-Performing Assets) on 31.03.2015, as per the guidelines issued by the RBI. Hence, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the defendants.

¶52

After the filing of the OA, Summon was sent to Defendants 1 & 2 through Registered Post with Acknowledgement due, which was returned unserved with postal endorsement as ‘Left’. Applicant Bank had caused Paper Publication of Notice and filed proof thereof. When OA was taken up on 28.07.2021 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, defendants were placed exparte on 28.07.2021.

¶53

T.A. No. 1605 of 2023

¶54

06.05.2025

¶55

¶56

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶57

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Mr. Shard Kumar Sinha, Assistant General Manager, Asset Recovery Branch 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 A-1 to A-7 . 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.

¶58

With regard to the amount advanced, 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:

¶59

: O R D E R :

¶60

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶61

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendants a sum of total sum of Rs.24,32,851/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs Thirty Two Thousand Eight Hundred & Fifty One Only) due in respect of Housing Loan (A/c No.60133708221) together with further interest @ 12.25%, p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full along with costs of this application.

¶62

T.A. No. 1605 of 2023

¶63

06.05.2025

¶64

¶65

(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 schedule mentioned immovable property morefully detailed in the OA;

¶66

¶67

(d) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of

¶68

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 date of this final order.

¶70

(f) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

¶71

T.A. No. 1605 of 2023

¶72

06.05.2025

¶73

¶74

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

¶75

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

¶76

(Dictated to Steno (Sudhakar), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 06^th day of May, 2025)

¶77

ANNEXURES

¶78

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶79

AW-1: Mr. Shard Kumar Sinha, Assistant General Manager, Asset Recovery Branch of the Applicant Bank.

¶80

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶81

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	Loan Application dated 18.04.2013	A-1
2.	Credit Sanction Intimation dated 30.05.2013	A-2
3.	Request letter dated 30.05.2013	A-3
4.	Demand Promissory Note dated 30.05.2013	A-4
5.	Agreement for Housing Loan dated 30.05.2013	A-5
6.	Guarantee Agreement dated 30.05.2013	A-6
7.	Account Extract with Certificate	A-7

¶82

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶83

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶84

SCHEDULE

¶85

All that piece and parcel of land and building constructed there on at Plot No.9 comprised in S.No.370/6 and 371/2 at Venkateswara Nagar Extension,

¶86

T.A. No. 1605 of 2023

¶87

¶88

06.05.2025

¶89

Venkatesapuram, Kalyankuppam Road, Ekkadu Village, Tiruvallur, Tiruvallur District and land being bounded on the

¶90

North by : 20 feet Road; South by : Plot No.8 East by : 23 feet Road; West by : Plot No.10

¶91

And having a liner measurement of

¶92

East to West on the Northern side : 30 feet, East to west on the Southern Side : 30 feet, North to South on the Eastern Side : 40 Feet, North to South on the Western Side : 40 Feet;

¶93

Admeasuring in all 1200 Sq.ft., of land together with building and situated within the Registration District of Tiruvallur & Sub-Registration District of Tiruvallur.

¶94

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

Bank of Maharashtra v. Suyambulingam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Maharashtra v. Suyambulingam

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

Canara Bank versus Perumal

Indian Overseas Bank versus Mb Studios LLP

Idbi Bank versus Saravanan Kumar

Bharathi R versus Bharathi R

S Ganesan versus Union Bank of India

Mr v Udhayakumar S O Venkadasamy versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited