Allowed

City Union Bank Limited v. Purasawakam Santhatha Sanga Nidhi Limited

DRT17 Jul 2026MA/165/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed an application for condonation of delay by a bank seeking to re-present an Original Application for recovery of dues. Delay was condoned subject to payment of legal aid fees and filing a compliance report.

What did the court decide?

Allowed application for condonation of 285 days delay, subject to payment of Rs. 3,000 to TNSLSA and filing compliance report.

City Union Bank Limited versus Purasawakam Santhatha Sanga… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶3

Dated this the 17^th day of July 2026

¶4

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶5

M.A. No.165 of 2026 in OA Dy.No.1992/2024

¶6

M/s City Union Bank Ltd., Purasawalkam Branch

¶7

Represented by its Branch Manager, Old No. 42, New No. 107, Dr. Alagappa road, Purusaiwalkam, Chennai- 600 084

¶8

...Applicant

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

Purasawakam Santhatha Sanga Nidhi Ltd.,

¶11

Represented by its Directors,

¶12

a) Mr. P.P. Subramaniam, b) Mr. J. Mohan

¶13

c) Mr. Venkatraman,

¶14

No.49, (Old 47), Vellala Street,

¶15

Purusaiwalkam, Chennai- 600084

¶16

Mr. P.P. Subramaniam

¶17

S/o Mr. P.M. Palani, Director of M/s Purasawakam Santhatha Sanga Nidhi Ltd 25/13, Cresent avenue,

¶18

Kesava Perumal Puram,

¶19

Greenways road, Chennai- 600028

¶20

Mr. J. Mohan, S/o Mr. Janakiram, Director of M/s Purasawakam Santhatha Sanga Nidhi Ltd No.49, (Old 47), Vellala street,

¶21

Purusaiwalkam, Chennai- 600084

¶22

Mr. Venkatraman, S/o Mr. Sundaresan, Director of M/s Purasawakam Santhatha Sanga Nidhi Ltd No.49, (Old 47), Vellala street, Purusaiwalkam, Chennai- 600084 …Defendants

¶23

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶24

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. Ananda Gomathy

¶25

Uploaded on17.07.2026 at 13:30 hours

¶26

¶27

ORDER IN MA No.165/2026

¶28

MA No.165 of 2026 is taken up. This is an application filed by applicant bank for condonation of delay of 285 days in re-presenting the OA.

¶29

Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank.

¶30

It is submitted by applicant bank that the present OA was filed for recovery of sum of Rs.2,39,33,633.51p (Rupees Two Crores Thirty Nine Lakhs Thirty Three Thousand Six Hundred and Thirty Three and Fifty One Paise only) together with interest and costs. It is submitted that the OA file was returned by the Registry for compliance on 17.01.2025. However as the Manager was not medical leave and not available, there was delay in getting some documents from the bank. Hence OA could not be represented within the time granted by this Tribunal, which is neither wilful nor wanton, but only due to aforesaid reasons. Therefore, the applicant bank prayed for condonation of delay of 285 days in re-presenting the OA.

¶31

Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank

¶32

and the records of the case.

¶33

As OA is filed for recovery of money due from borrower and in view of the fact that the bank being a financial institution is the custodian of the public money held under trust, the Tribunal relying on the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Madras (At Madurai) in the judgment of

¶34

V.P. Rajula -Vs.- K.J. Sakadeva Raja reported in LAWS (MAD)-

¶35

Uploaded on17.07.2026 at 13:30 hours

¶36

¶37

2020-8-441 feels it apt to condone the delay and give opportunity to applicant to prosecute their case.

¶38

Accordingly, MA No.165/26 stands allowed and delay is condoned, subject to payment of cost of Rs.3,000/- to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority on or before 11.08.2026 by the applicant and to file the compliance report before the Registry.

¶39

In case of the applicant complying with the order and filing compliance memo, Registry is directed to number the OA, if otherwise found to be in order. It is clarified that in case if the applicant bank fails to comply with the conditional order above, MA stand dismissed automatically without there being any need to pass separate order.

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

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

¶42

(Dictated to Roshnee, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 17^th day of July, 2026)

¶43

Uploaded on17.07.2026 at 13:30 hours

City Union Bank Limited v. Purasawakam Santhatha Sanga Nidhi Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

City Union Bank Limited v. Purasawakam Santhatha Sanga Nidhi Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Equital Small Finance Bank Limited versus Sri Bhavani Amman Engineering Works

Bank of Baroda versus Ms Shinko Equipments

Canara Bank versus Chitra

Bank of India versus Ms.Sivasankari.G

Yrs Garments versus Indian Bank

State Bank of India versus Mura Silks