Disposed

Bank of Baroda v. Lalli

DRT23 Jul 2025TA/291/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An Interim Application before DR T-III, Chennai was filed by a bank to secure dues of Rs. 71.99 lakh against respondents alleged to be disposing of mortgaged property. The Tribunal directed respondents to show cause against furnishing security within 15 days and ordered conditional attachment of the schedule property pending the OA disposal.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to show cause why they should not furnish security within 15 days; schedule property conditionally attached pending OA disposal.

Bank of Baroda versus Lalli — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

IA 1138/25 in TA 291/2023

¶2

23.07.2025

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 23^rd day of July, 2025

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

I.A. No.1138 of 2025 in T.A. No. 291 of 2023

¶8

Bank of Baroda (Erstwhile Vijaya Bank) Rangarajapuram Branch No.25, 1^st Street, Nagarjuna Nagar Kodambakkam

¶9

Chennai – 600 024 Rep. by its Manager ….Applicant

¶10

-Vs-

¶11

Mrs. S. Lalli

¶12

W/o N. Sekar

¶13

Mr. N. Sekar

¶14

S/o Narayanan

¶15

Both residing at No.94B, 4^th Main Road Prakash Nagar, Ponniammanmedu Chennai – 600 110

¶16

M/s SR Paper Products Pvt. Ltd

¶17

Rep. by its Proprietor S. Lalli

¶18

Having office at No.94B, 4^th Main Road Prakash Nagar, Ponniammanmedu Chennai – 600 110 …..Respondents / Defendants

¶19

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶20

Counsel for Applicant : Sh. A.S. Vijayabaskar

¶21

: - ORDER ON IA NO.1138 of 2025- :

¶22

The Original Application is filed by the Applicant Bank against the

¶23

Defendants, seeking for recovery of money due from Defendants jointly

¶24

IA 1138/25 in TA 291/2023

¶25

23.07.2025

¶26

¶27

and severally to pay a sum of Rs.71,99,737/- (Rupees Seventy One Lakhs Ninety Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Thirty Seven only) due as on 31.10.2021 together with further interest and costs.

¶28

The Applicant Bank has filed the present petition i.e., I.A.No.1138/2025 with affidavit of the Chief Manager of applicant bank, seeking for an order directing respondent to furnish security to the extent of the OA claim, as may be sufficient and in default of the same, to order for attachment of the schedule mentioned property belonging to the respondents, pending disposal of the above OA.

¶29

It is the case of Applicant that the 1^st and 2^nd respondents, availed Housing Loan facility to the tune of Rs.39,20,000/- from the applicant bank. Loan is secured by mortgage by way of deposit of title deeds of the immovable property morefully detailed in the schedule to OA. Third respondent, represented by its Proprietrix, first respondent availed Working Capital facility of Rs.10 lakhs from applicant bank, for which second respondent stood a guarantor. Defendants executed loan and security documents in favour of the applicant bank.

¶30

It is further submitted by applicant that due to default in operating the loan accounts, it was classified as NPA on 29.06.2018, as per RBI guidelines. Inspite of repeated requests and demands made by the applicant bank, defendants failed to repay the loan amount. The applicant bank initiated recovery measures under SARFAESI Act and issued Demand Notice, Possession Notice followed by Sale Notice and sold

¶31

IA 1138/25 in TA 291/2023

¶32

¶33

23.07.2025

¶34

the secured asset in the E-auction, recovered a sum of Rs.27,23,000/-and issued sale certificate in favour of successful bidder.

¶35

The applicant bank now came to understand that the respondents are owing the immovable property morefully described in the schedule to the petition. The respondents are making attempts to dispose off the petition schedule mentioned property, in order to deprive the applicant bank the fruits of the eventual Recovery Certificate. Hence the present application is filed to direct the respondents to furnish security to the tune of OA claim, failing which to pass an order of attachment before judgment of the petition schedule mentioned property, till the disposal of the OA.

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

It is a matter of record that the OA was filed for recovery of sum of Rs.71,99,737/-, which is a colossal sum of money. Considering the 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.

¶39

IA 1138/25 in TA 291/2023

¶40

23.07.2025

¶41

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

(ii)is about to remove the whole or any part of the property from the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal; or (iii)is likely to cause any damage or mischief to the property or affect its value by misuse or creating third party interest,

¶47

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

¶48

(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

¶49

IA 1138/25 in TA 291/2023

¶50

23.07.2025

¶51

¶52

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.”

¶53

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

¶54

:ORDER:

¶55

In the circumstances pleaded, respondents are hereby directed to show cause as to why she should not furnish security to the tune of balance OA claim (after recovery of a sum of Rs.27,23,000/- by way of sale of mortgaged property), within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which to attach the IA schedule mentioned property owned by the 1^st respondent to answer the OA claim herein.

¶56

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

¶57

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

¶58

IA 1138/25 in TA 291/2023

¶59

23.07.2025

¶60

¶61

IA Schedule property shall form part of this order.

¶62

Sd/-

¶63

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

¶64

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the

¶65

23^rd day of July, 2025)

¶66

:- SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY -:

¶67

All that piece and parcel of Land measuring 800 Sq.Ft., in Plot No.94 Part, Prakash Nagar, comprised in S.No.1223 as per Patta No.5670 S.No.1223/1A1A5 of Madhavaram Village, Madhavaram Taluk, Thirvallur District and

¶68

Bounded on the

¶69

North by : 20 Feet Road

¶70

South by : Plot No.93

¶71

East by : Plot No.94 Part, (Property belongs to Mr.Kubendran and Mrs.Kasthuri)

¶72

West by : Plot No.94 Part (Property belongs to Mrs.Geetha)

¶73

Measuring

¶74

East to West on the Northern Side : 20 Feet

¶75

East to West on the Southern Side : 20 Feet

¶76

North to South on the Eastern Side : 40 Feet

¶77

North to South on the Western Side: 40 Feet

¶78

Situated within the Registration District of Chennai North and Sub Registration District of Sembiam.

¶79

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

Bank of Baroda v. Lalli

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Lalli

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

Mr S Velmurugan versus Repco Home Finance Limited

Idbi Bank versus The Goverment Telecommunication Emp Co. Op Socity Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Anbu

Indian Bank versus Rajapandi

Dbs Bank Limited versus Krishna Jewellers

Union Bank of India versus Vijayalakshmi