Allowed

Indian Bank v. M/S Dinesh Power Products

DRT7 Nov 2025TA/595/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an ex-parte application filed by Indian Bank under the RDB Act for recovery of nearly Rs. 22.34 lakhs consisting of an SME loan and overdraft facility, the Debt Recovery Tribunal examined the unchallenged claim supported by documentary evidence and affirmed the bank's right to recovery.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 22,33,723.83 with further interest @ 13.85% and 8.85%, penal interest @ 2%, and costs.

Indian Bank versus M/S Dinesh Power Products — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 595 of 2023

¶2

07.11.2025

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 07^th day of November, 2025

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

TRANSFERRED APPLICATION No. 595 of 2023

¶8

(Originally filed before DRT- II, Chennai as OA 353/2021 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No 595 of 2023)

¶9

Indian Bank

¶10

4, Big Street, Triplicane,

¶11

Chennai – 600 005

¶12

Rep. by its Manager Vijaya Bhaskar S/o Veeraswamy ….Applicant

¶13

-Vs-

¶14

M/s. Dinesh Power Products

¶15

Old no.3, New no.5, Chimmappa Street, Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005

¶16

Rep. by its Proprietor R. Damotharan

¶17

R. Damotharan S/o Ramasamy Old No 9, New No. 14

¶18

Raja Hanumantha Lane

¶19

Nallathambi Street,

¶20

Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005

¶21

Anbu Chezhian S/o Gunasekara Pandian

¶22

22/7, Sydoji Street, I Floor

¶23

Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005 …..Defendants

¶24

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶25

Counsel for Applicant : Mrs. S.R. Sumathy

¶26

Defendants 1 to 3 were set ex-parte on 24.08.2022

¶27

: - FINAL ORDER - :

¶28

This Original Application is filed on 08.07.2021 by the applicant

¶29

bank under Section 19 (1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial

¶30

Institutions Act, 1993) against the defendants jointly and severally for

¶31

T.A. No. 595 of 2023

¶32

¶33

07.11.2025

¶34

recovery of a total sum of Rs.22,33,723.83p (Rupees Twenty Two

¶35

Lakhs Thirty Three Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty Three

¶36

and Eighty Three Paisa Only) as follows:

¶37

(i) A sum of Rs.21,33,761.05p due in respect of SME Loan facility (A/c No.6406959076), repayable together with further interest @ 13.85%, p.a. with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% from the date of filing the OA, till date of realization in full;

¶38

(ii) A sum of Rs.99,962.78p due in respect of Over Draft Facility (A/c No.6594173926), repayable together with further interest @ 8.85%, p.a. with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% from the date of filing the OA till date of realization in full; and for costs of this application.

¶39

Originally, this Application was filed before DRT-II, Chennai, assigned OA No.353 of 2021, and thereafter in pursuance to the notification from Ministry of Finance, DFS dated 04.10.2022, OA No.353 of 2021 stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.595 of 2023.

¶40

Brief Facts of the case:

¶41

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 Tribunal.

¶42

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

¶43

T.A. No. 595 of 2023

¶44

¶45

07.11.2025

¶46

represented by the 2^nd Defendant applied for SME Loan under CGT scheme on 28.01.2016 and the 2^nd Defendant OD facility on 30.12.2017 and the Applicant Bank sanctioned the loans as given

¶47

below:

¶48

Date of Loan	Amount (Rs.) Limit	Type of Loan	Rate of Interest and Repayment
02.02.2016	20,00,000	CGT SME Loan А/с. No. 6406959076 Availed by the 1^st Defendant	15.15% 84 EMIs
30.12.2017	72,800	OD facility A/c No. 6594173926 availed bythe 2^ndDefendant	8.85%

¶49

It is submitted by the applicant bank that the Defendants had availed the above SME Loan and OD facility and executed the following documents in favour of the Applicant Bank:

¶50

(i) Sanction ticket of applicant bank, accepted and endorsed by the 1^st and 3^rd Defendants dated 02.02.2016

¶51

(ii) Demand Promissory Note dated 02.02.2016

¶52

(iii) Agreement of Hypothecation of Movables dated 02.02.2016

¶53

(iv) Medium Term Loan Agreement dated 02.02.2016

¶54

(v) Agreement of Guarantee dated 02.02.2016

¶55

(vi) Acknowledgement of Debt and Security dated 03.01.2019 (vii) Application cum pledge letter for advances against Sovereign gold Bonds of RBI dated 30.12.2017

¶56

T.A. No. 595 of 2023

¶57

07.11.2025

¶58

¶59

It is submitted by the applicant bank that the 3^rd Defendant guaranteed the above loan by executing a Guarantee agreement. The 1^st Defendant is a Proprietary firm, the 2^nd Defendant is the Proprietor of the 1^st Defendant firm and the 3^rd Defendant is the Guarantor who guaranteed the above credit facilities. Hence, they are jointly and severally liable for the debts. The following are the details of hypothecation in favour of applicant bank:

¶60

i. Sovereign gold Bonds Scheme - 2015-16

¶61

ii. Certificate number - SGB000001002293432-1002293471

¶62

iii. Date - 08.02.2016

¶63

iv. Initial Investment - 40 units - Rs.1,04,000/-

¶64

v. Redeemable on 08.02.2024 with option for early redemption

¶65

from 5^th Year

¶66

The Applicant Bank submits that the Defendants have accepted

¶67

the Terms and conditions of the said facilities and executed the loan documents. The Defendants also agreed to pay interest as per RBI Guidelines.

¶68

It is further submitted by the Applicant Bank that right from the beginning there were considerable delay and default in repayment of loan. In spite of frequent reminders through letters and telephone by senior officers of the Applicant Bank, there was no improvement and no payment was received from for the reasons best known to the Defendants. On account of delay/default committed by the Defendants, the credit facilities availed under SME Loan amounting to

¶69

T.A. No. 595 of 2023

¶70

07.11.2025

¶71

¶72

Rs.21,33,761.05 vide Loan Account No.6406950076 and Over Draft facility amounting to Rs.99.962.78 vide Loan Account No.6594173926 totaling Rs.22,33,723.83 (Rupees twenty two lakhs thirty three thousand seven hundred and twenty three and eighty three paisa only) as on 31.01.2021 was classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 28.02.2018 as per the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India.

¶73

The Applicant submits that the efforts of the Applicant bank in persuading the Defendants to pay the installments in time and to avoid overdue did not yield any positive result. The Applicant caused several letters requesting the defendants to repay and regularize account. The applicant bank also issued a notice on 12.09.2018 asking the Defendants to settle the overdue amounts. But, the Defendants chose to not to respond. The outstanding balance in the account of the defendants in two loans i.e. SME Loan amounting to Rs.21,33,761.05 vide Loan Account No.6406959076 and Over Draft facility amounting to Rs.99,962.78 vide Loan Account No.6594173926 totaling Rs.22,33,723.83 as on 31.01.2021. Hence the present Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant bank for recovery of its dues from defendants.

¶74

After the filing of the OA, summons were sent to Defendants through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, summons to D1 to D3 returned with the remark “No such person”. Applicant bank had caused paper publication of the notice and filed proof thereof. When

¶75

T.A. No. 595 of 2023

¶76

07.11.2025

¶77

¶78

OA was taken up on 24.08.2022 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, defendants 1 to 3 were placed ex-parte on 24.08.2022.

¶79

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the

¶80

records.

¶81

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Ms. V. Meenakshi, Manager representing the Applicant Bank, has filed her 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-11 . 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.

¶82

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:

¶83

: O R D E R :

¶84

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶85

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendants, a total sum of Rs.22,33,723.83p (Rupees Twenty

¶86

Two Lakhs Thirty Three Thousand Seven Hundred and Twenty Three and Eighty Three Paisa Only) as follows:

¶87

T.A. No. 595 of 2023

07.11.2025

(b) 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.

¶93

¶94

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

¶95

T.A. No. 595 of 2023

¶96

¶97

07.11.2025

¶98

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

¶99

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

¶100

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

¶101

ANNEXURES

¶102

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶103

AW-1: Ms. V. Meenakshi, Manager representing the Applicant Bank.

¶104

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶105

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	Sanction ticket of applicant bank, accepted and endorsed by the 1^stand 3^rdDefendants dated 02.02.2016.	A-1
2.	Demand Promissory Note dated 02.02.2016.	A-2
3.	Agreement of Hypothecation of Movables dated 02.02.2016.	A-3
4.	Medium Term Loan Agreement dated 02.02.2016.	A-4
5.	Agreement of Guarantee dated 02.02.2016.	A-5
6.	Acknowledgement of Debt and Security dated 03.01.2019.	A-6
7.	Application cum pledge letter for advances against Sovereign gold Bonds of RBI dated 30.12.2017.	A-7
8.	Sovereign Gold Bonds Scheme 2015-16- Certificate no SGB000001002293432- 1002293471 dated 08.02.2016.	A-8
9.	Note from Applicant Bank dated 12.09.2018.	A-9
10.	Statement of Accounts of CGTMSE account no 6406959076 dated 02.02.2016 to 31.01.2021	A-10
11.	Statement of Accounts of OD account no 6594173926 dated 31.12.2017 to 31.01.2021.	A-11

¶106

T.A. No. 595 of 2023

¶107

¶108

07.11.2025

¶109

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶110

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶111

SCHEDULE

¶112

-NIL-

¶113

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

Indian Bank v. M/S Dinesh Power Products

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. M/S Dinesh Power Products

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 Baroda versus Samuel Jabakumar

Idbi Bank versus Mr Aj Satheshkumar

Canara Bank versus Yes Leathers

Hdfc Bank versus Equipments Spares and Services

Bank of India versus M/S Madan Textiles

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus M/S Chandrika Builders