Allowed

Federal Bank v. Sakthi

DRT24 Jul 2026MA/167/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal condoned a 138-day delay in re-presenting an Original Appeal filed by a bank. The order allowed the application subject to payment of costs and filing a compliance report within a specified timeframe, failing which the application would stand dismissed automatically.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 138 days condoned; application allowed subject to payment of Rs.1,000 to TN State Legal Services Authority by 14.08.2026 and filing compliance report; non-compliance leads to automatic dismis

Federal Bank versus Sakthi — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶3

Dated this the 24^th day of July 2026

¶4

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶5

M.A. No.167 of 2026 in OA Dy.No.3350/2025

¶6

The Federal Bank Ltd, Represented by its Associate Vice President, Chennai- Mogappair Branch, No.5/450, Ground floor, Pari Salai, Mogappair east, Mogappair, Chennai- 600 037

¶7

...Applicant

¶8

-Vs-

¶9

Mr. Sakthi, S/o Mr. Velayudam, No.6/15 G1, 26^th street, GKM Colony, Jawahar Nagar, Chennai- 600 082 …Defendant

¶10

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶11

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. David Tyagaraj

¶12

ORDER IN MA No.167/2026

¶13

MA No.167 of 2026 is taken up. This is an application filed by applicant bank for condonation of delay of 138 days in re-presenting the OA.

¶14

Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank.

¶15

It is submitted by applicant bank that the present OA was filed for

¶16

recovery of sum of Rs.21,36,934/- together with interest and costs. It is submitted that the OA was returned by the Registry on 28.11.2025 for

¶17

Uploaded on 24.07.2026 at 16:00 hours

¶18

¶19

compliance of objections. The counsel was not aware that the said return and he came to know about this only on 08.05.2026. Hence OA could not be re-presented 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 138 days in representing the OA.

¶20

Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank and the records of the case.

¶21

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

¶22

of Hon’ble High Court of Madras (At Madurai) in the judgment of

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

Accordingly, MA No.167/26 stands allowed and delay is condoned, subject to payment of cost of Rs.1,000/- to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority on or before 14.08.2026 by the applicant and to file the compliance report before the Registry.

¶26

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

¶27

Uploaded on 24.07.2026 at 16:00 hours

¶28

¶29

to comply with the conditional order above, MA stand dismissed

¶30

automatically without there being any need to pass separate order.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

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

¶33

(Dictated to Roshnee, typed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on

¶34

this the 24^th day of July, 2026)

¶35

Uploaded on 24.07.2026 at 16:00 hours

Federal Bank v. Sakthi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Federal Bank v. Sakthi

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

State Bank of India versus Abdul Basith

Canara Bank versus N Elayaraja

Syndicate Bank versus M/S Abihil Agency

Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. versus Sarangapani

Vinod Sharma versus Karur Vysya Bank

Challani Ranka Jewellery versus Indian Overseas Bank