Allowed

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Anbu

DRT7 Aug 2026MA/181/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal condoned a delay of 244 days in re-presenting an Office Application filed by Karnataka Bank Limited for recovery of money, relying on the principle that banks act as custodians of public money, and ordered payment of costs to the Legal Services Authority.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 244 days in re-presenting the OA is condoned, subject to payment of Rs. 3,000 to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority.

Karnataka Bank Limited versus Anbu — DRT (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶3

Dated this the 07^th day of August 2026

¶4

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶5

M.A. No.181 of 2026 in OA Dy.No.5519/2023

¶6

Karnataka Bank Limited, No.53, TNHB Main road, Kakklur By Pass, Thiruvallur- 602 001

¶7

...Applicant

¶8

-Vs-

¶9

Mr.Anbu,

¶10

S/o Kanniyappan,

¶11

No. 23/49, Perumal Koil Street,

¶12

Krishnapuram village, Poondi, Thiruvallur- 602 023

¶13

Mrs.Sridevi.A

¶14

W/o Anbu.K

¶15

Old No.184, New No. 36, Haji Mohammed Abdul Hafees Street, Kosapet, Perambur, Chennai- 600 012 …Defendants

¶16

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶17

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. Ramalingam & Associates

¶18

ORDER IN MA No.181/2026

¶19

MA No.181 of 2026 is taken up. This is an application filed by applicant bank for condonation of delay of 244 days in re-presenting the OA.

¶20

Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank.

¶21

It is submitted by applicant bank that the present OA was filed for recovery of sum of Rs.32,59,219.43/- (Rupees Thirty two lakhs fifty nine thousand two hundred and nineteen and forty three paise only) together

¶22

with interest and costs. It is submitted that the OA file was returned by

¶23

¶24

the Registry on 14.08.2025. In order to obtain the English translation of Tamil Deed documents, there was a shortage of officers for processing in the legal department and also the approval of reimbursement of cost and additional time was consumed in obtaining the document. Further the original application was represented on 12.05.2026. 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 244 days in representing the OA.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

Accordingly, MA No.181/26 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 04.09.2026 by the applicant and to file the compliance report before the Registry.

¶31

¶32

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

¶33

to comply with the conditional order above, MA stand dismissed automatically without there being any need to pass separate order.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

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

¶36

(Dictated to Roshnee, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 07^th day of August, 2026)

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Anbu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karnataka Bank Limited v. Anbu

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

Ms Peri Educational and Charitable Trust versus Indian Overseas Bank

Bank of Baroda versus Marudhu Enterprises

Bank of Baroda versus M s Kavan Bag India Pvt. Ltd.

Bank of India versus Cert Technologies

Indian Bank versus Sri Lakshmi Water Supply

Federal Bank versus udayakathiravan