Allowed

State Bank of India v. M/S Aikya Agency

DRT25 Nov 2025TA/648/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the recovery application by State Bank of India against M/s Aikya Agency and Mrs. K. Merrlyn for a Term Loan. Absentee defendants were impleaded ex-parte. The Tribunal affirmed the bank's claim for principal and interest, permitting recovery through hypothecated and personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 32,65,078 plus future interest at 11.55% per annum, with liberty to sell schedule hypothecated assets and personal assets of Defendants.

State Bank of India versus M/S Aikya Agency — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 648 of 2023

¶2

25.11.2025

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 25^th day of November, 2025

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

TRANSFERRED APPLICATION No. 648 of 2023

¶8

(Originally filed before DRT- II, Chennai as OA 17/2020 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No 648 of 2023)

¶9

State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Cell, No.157, 5^th Floor, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002 Rep. by its Manager

¶10

….Applicant

¶11

-Vs-

¶12

M/s Aikya Agency, Rep. by Prop. Mrs. K. Merrlyn, No.95, 96 & 97 Railway Feeder Road, Virudhunagar 626 001

¶13

Mrs. K. Merrlyn, W/o Kevin Benno, KPRMB Camps, No.95, 96 & 97 Railway Feeder Road, Virudhunagar 626 001 …..Defendants

¶14

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶15

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. M. Suresh Defendants 1 and 2 were set ex-parte on 26.05.2022

¶16

: - FINAL ORDER - :

¶17

This Original Application is filed on 18.12.2019 by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993) against the defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.32,65,078/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs Sixty Five

¶18

T.A. No. 648 of 2023

¶19

¶20

25.11.2025

¶21

Thousand Seventy Eight only) due in respect of Term Loan Facility (Account No.65293434451) repayable together with further interest @ 11.55% per annum with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization in full, for sale of schedule mentioned hypothecated assets and for costs of this application.

¶22

Originally, this Application was filed before DRT-II, Chennai, assigned OA No.17 of 2020, and thereafter in pursuance to the notification from Ministry of Finance, DFS dated 04.10.2022, OA No.17 of 2020 stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.648 of 2023.

¶23

Brief Facts of the case:

¶24

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.

¶25

It is the case of the applicant bank 1^st defendant is Proprietary concern represented by its Proprietor, 2^nd defendant herein. The defendants had approached Bharathiya Mahila Bank, since merged with State Bank of India vide RBI circular dated 22.03.2017 and requested for financial assistance for improving their business.

¶26

It is submitted by the applicant bank that considering the said request, the Bharathiya Mahila Bank had sanctioned Term Loan amount

¶27

T.A. No. 648 of 2023

¶28

¶29

25.11.2025

¶30

of Rs.30 Lakhs vide Sanction Letter dated 27.03.2015, which was since availed by the 1^st defendant.

¶31

It is submitted by the applicant bank that in order to secure the loan, the defendants executed a General Term Loan Agreement and Hypothecation Agreement and Demand Promissory Note dated 27.03.2015 in favour of Bharathiya Mahila Bank. The 2^nd defendant has executed a Guarantee Agreement dated 27.03.2015 in favour of Bharathiya Mahila Bank. Subsequently Bharatiya Mahila Bank has merged with State Bank of India on 22^nd March 2017, as per direction of Reserve Bank of India.

¶32

In evidence of availing the credit facilities and as security thereof,

¶33

the defendants have executed the following loan documents in favour of applicant bank:

¶34

a) Sanction Letter dated 27.03.2015 acknowledged by the 1^st defendant

¶35

b) General Term Loan Agreement dated 27.03.2015 executed by the

¶36

1^st defendant in favour of Bharathi Mahila Bank.

¶37

c) Term Loan Agreement dated 27.03.2015 executed by the 1^st defendant in favour Bharathi Mahila Bank.

¶38

d) Hypothecation Agreement dated 27.03.2015 executed by the 1^st defendant favour of Bharathi Mahila Bank

¶39

e) Guarantee Agreement dated 27.03.2015 executed by the 2^nd defendant

¶40

T.A. No. 648 of 2023

¶41

25.11.2025

¶42

¶43

f) Demand Promissory Note dated 27.03.2015 executed by the defendant's in favour of Bharathi Mahila Bank.

¶44

It is submitted by the applicant bank that subsequent to availing of loan, the defendants failed to repay the loan dues. Hence the applicant bank has issued Legal Notice dated 25.11.2019, through his counsel. Inspite of repeated demands and several reminders made, the defendants failed to repay the balance of the liability owed by them to the Applicant Bank under the aforesaid credit facility. Consequently, the loan account of the defendants was classified as Non-Performing Assets (NPA) in terms of the directives of Reserve Bank of India.

¶45

The applicant bank submits that the defendants have undertaken to repay the loan amount together with interest as per the terms and conditions of the General Term Loan Agreement dated 27.03.2015 executed by the 1^st defendant in favour of applicant bank. The defendants have been repeatedly making representations to the defendants to regularize the account. But the defendants did not take any concrete steps to regularize the loan account or to repay the loan amount. Hence, the present Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant bank for recovery of its dues from the defendants.

¶46

After the filing of the OA, summons were sent to Defendants 1 and 2 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, which was duly served. When OA was taken up on 26.05.2022 even after giving

¶47

T.A. No. 648 of 2023

¶48

25.11.2025

¶49

¶50

sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, defendants 1 and 2 were placed ex-parte on 26.05.2022.

¶51

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the

¶52

records.

¶53

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Sh. T. Anbarasu, Manager representing 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-10 . 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.

¶54

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:

¶55

: O R D E R :

¶56

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶57

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendants a sum of Rs.32,65,078/- (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs Sixty Five Thousand Seventy Eight only) due in respect of Term Loan Facility (Account No.65293434451) repayable together with further interest @ 11.55% per annum with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of

¶58

T.A. No. 648 of 2023

¶59

25.11.2025

¶60

¶61

realization in full, along with costs.

¶62

(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 hypothecated assets morefully detailed in the OA.

¶63

¶64

(d) If the sale proceeds of the hypothecated assets are not sufficient to satisfy the dues as ordered above, the applicant bank is at liberty to sell the personal assets of the 2^nd Defendant (both movable and immovable) to recover the balance dues as required under law for which the 2^nd Defendant to disclose to the Tribunal particulars of other properties or assets owned by the 2^nd Defendant.

¶65

(e) 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

¶66

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.

¶67

(f) The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the date of receipt of this final order.

¶68

T.A. No. 648 of 2023

¶69

25.11.2025

¶70

¶71

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

¶72

Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

¶73

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

¶74

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

¶75

(Dictated to Steno (Deepika), transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 25^th day of November, 2025)

¶76

ANNEXURES

¶77

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶78

AW-1: Sh. T. Anbarasu, Manager representing the Applicant Bank.

¶79

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶80

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	Reserve Bank of India Circular regarding merger with Bharatiya Mahila Bank Limited with State Bank of India dated 22.03.2017.	A-1
2.	Sanction Letter dated 27.03.2015.	A-2
3.	General Term Loan Agreement dated 27.03.2015.	A-3
4.	Term Loan Agreement dated 27.03.2015.	A-4
5.	Hypothecation Agreement dated 27.03.2015.	A-5
6.	Guarantee Agreement dated 27.03.2015.	A-6
7.	Demand Promissory Note dated 17.10.2016.	A-7
8.	Legal Notice & Acknowledgement dated 25.11.2019.	A-8
9.	State of Account and Certificate of Banker’s Book Evidence Act 1891 dated 27.03.2015 to 25.11.2019.	A-9
10.	Authorization Circular	A-10

¶81

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶82

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶83

T.A. No. 648 of 2023

25.11.2025

:- SCHEDULE -:

All the tangible movable machinery and plant of the Borrower together with spares, tools and accessories and other movables, both present and future, whether lying loose or in cases which are not lying or stores in or about or shall be brought into or be stores or be in or upon or about the Borrowers’ premises and go downs or wherever else the same may be or be held by any party to the order or disposition of the Borrower relating to or pertaining to the Borrower at KPRMB Camps, No.95, 96 &

¶88

97 Railway Feeder Road, Virudhunagar 626 001.

¶89

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

State Bank of India v. M/S Aikya Agency

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. M/S Aikya Agency

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 Kumar Son of Kutti versus Equitas Small Finance Bank Limited

Uma versus South Indian Bank

Indian Overseas Bank versus Rajeswari M

Central Bank of India versus Mr Kamaraj Prop Jayalakshmi Industries S

State Bank of India versus Hemnath

Punjab National Bank versus Chetan Kapil Dev Sharma