Allowed

State Bank of India v. Latheef

DRT3 Aug 2026OA/258/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of loans defaulting by the respondents. The court noted the defendants were set ex-parte. It recorded a partial satisfaction via property sale and directed recovery of the balance dues from personal assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of total sum of Rs.26,19,193/- for housing loan and term loan with interest, plus realization of sale proceeds credited to account.

State Bank of India versus Latheef — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

O.A. No. 258 of 2024

¶2

03.08.2026

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 03^rd day of August, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 258 of 2024

¶8

State Bank of India, SARB Chennai II, No.4/1, Bala Vinayagar Building, 1st Floor, No.152 Eldams Road, Teynampet, Chennai-600018 Represented by its City Case officer . ….Applicant

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

Mr. A. Abdul Lateef, S/o Abu Backer

¶11

No.24/12, 2nd Street, Dasarathapuram, Saligramam, Chennai-600 093.

¶12

Mrs. Sharmila Banu, W/o A.Abdul Lateef No.24/12, 2nd Street, Dasarathapuram, Saligramam, Chennai-600 093. …..Defendants

¶13

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶14

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. S. Vaidyanathan

¶15

Defendants were set ex-parte on 25.11.2024

¶16

: - FINAL ORDER - :

¶17

This Original application is filed on 18.01.2024 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 jointly and severally for recovery of a total

¶18

Uploaded in E-Drt at 11:32 a.m., on 03.08.2026

¶19

O.A. No. 258 of 2024

¶20

¶21

03.08.2026

¶22

sum of Rs.26,19,193/- (Rupees Twenty Six Lakhs Nineteen

¶23

Thousand One Hundred Ninety Three only) as follows:

¶24

(i) A sum of Rs.25,49,585/- due in respect of Housing Loan (A/c No.40567076056) repayable together with further interest @ 9.45% p.a. with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% p.a. from the date of filing the OA till date of realization in full;

¶25

(ii) A sum of Rs.69,608/- due in respect of Term Loan for Insurance Premium (A/c No.40567119151) repayable together with further interest @ 9.45% p.a. with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% p.a. from the date of filing the OA, till date of realization in full;

¶26

for sale of immovable property more fully detailed in Schedule to the OA and for costs of this application.

¶27

Brief Facts of the case:

¶28

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.

¶29

It is the case of the Applicant Bank that the defendants who are salaried individuals had applied for a Housing Loan of Rs.23,58,000/- for purchase of Flat at S-1. "Sri Jangannathar Flats", 2nd Floor, Plot no.14B and 15, Sri Devi Karumariamman Nagar, Noombal Village, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District vide Application dated 06.10.2021.

¶30

Uploaded in E-Drt at 11:32 a.m., on 03.08.2026

¶31

O.A. No. 258 of 2024

¶32

¶33

03.08.2026

¶34

It is submitted that the Applicant Bank had sanctioned the loan amount of Rs.23.58 lakhs vide Sanction Letter dated 08.11.2021 and the Defendants have executed the following documents in favour of the Applicant on 08.11.2021:

¶35

i. Arrangement Letter

¶36

ii. Agreement to Mortgage

¶37

iii. Memorandum of Home Loan Agreement

¶38

iv. Affidavit to construct as per sanctioned plan

¶39

The applicant bank submits that in order to secure the loan, the defendants have deposited the Sale Deed dated 11.11.2021 registered as Doc.no.20646/2021 before SRO, Kundrathur and Construction Agreement dated 24.09.2021 registered as Doc.no.20640/2021 before SRO, Kunrathur, with the Applicant Bank for creation of security of the property in favour of the Applicant Bank, and had also executed Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 11.11.2021 registered as Doc. No.20647/2021 with SRO, Kunrathur.

¶40

It is submitted that the request of the Defendants vide Application dated 10.11.2021, the Applicant Bank had further sanctioned a Term Loan of Rs.66,000/- for the purpose of availing Life Insurance to cover the liability for amount of the loan availed and had executed Agreement dated 16.11.2021 accepting the terms and conditions of sanction.

¶41

As per the documents executed by the Defendants, the loan was to be repaid in 360 Equated Monthly Instalments of Rs.15,609/- from December, 2021 with interest at the rate of 6.95% per annum to be reset

¶42

Uploaded in E-Drt at 11:32 a.m., on 03.08.2026

¶43

O.A. No. 258 of 2024

¶44

03.08.2026

¶45

¶46

from time to time. The Loan for Insurance premium was to be repaid in EMI's of Rs.500/-commencing from 10.12.2021 for the same tenure as the Housing Loan.

¶47

The applicant bank submits that after availing the Housing Loan and Term Loan, the Defendants have not honoured the terms of the Agreement and have failed to repay the loan instalments as per terms of the sanction. The Applicant had sent various reminders to the Defendants to regularize the loan, but no response was received from the Defendants. The loan was therefore classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) as per RBI Norms on 11.08.2023.

¶48

The Applicant Bank has issued Demand notice dated 22.08.2023 to the Defendants under the SARFAESI Act, but the Defendants have not come forward to repay their dues. In the above circumstances, the Applicant Bank is approaching this Tribunal by way of this Application for the recovery of Rs.25,49,585/- in the Housing Loan and Rs.69,608/- in the Term Loan for Insurance premium with interest at 9.45% p.a. from 10.01.2024 in the loan accounts. Hence, the present Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant bank for recovery of its dues from the defendants.

¶49

After the filing of the OA, summons were sent to the Defendants 1 and 2 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, summons to D1 and D2 were duly served. When OA was taken up on 25.11.2024 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, defendants 1 and 2 were placed ex-parte on

¶50

Uploaded in E-Drt at 11:32 a.m., on 03.08.2026

¶51

O.A. No. 258 of 2024

03.08.2026

25.11.2024.

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the

¶56

records.

¶57

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Mr. S. Surender, Deputy Manager, of 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-9 .

¶58

A careful examination of the pleadings in the Proof Affidavit and documents Exhibits A-1 to A-9 evidence that the borrowal of credit facilities and execution of loan and security documents are true, in terms of averments made in Original Application as well as Proof Affidavit filed by applicant bank establishing its claim. Applicant bank filed Statement of Accounts duly certified under Bankers’ Book Evidence Act, evidencing the amount claimed against defendants.

¶59

The defendants were set ex-parte on 25.11.2024, but till this day they did not take any action to set aside the ex-parte order and did not choose to contest the claim. Further, a careful scrutiny of records makes it clear that present application is filed well within limitation and this Tribunal possesses necessary and proper jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the claim. No oral or documentary evidence on the side of defendants are produced or filed to dispute the claim of applicant bank. Hence, it can be concluded that applicant bank has proved its claim against defendants. 14. During the pendency of OA, Applicant Bank had reported part satisfaction of OA claim in a sum of Rs.24,73,000/- by way of sale of

¶60

Uploaded in E-Drt at 11:32 a.m., on 03.08.2026

¶61

O.A. No. 258 of 2024

¶62

03.08.2026

¶63

¶64

Schedule immovable property under SARFAESI Act on 11.06.2025 and the entire sale consideration was received in the account on 02.07.2025. Accordingly, part satisfaction of sum of Rs.24,73,000/- was duly recorded vide proceedings dated 25.02.2026.

¶65

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:

¶66

: O R D E R :

¶67

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶68

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendants jointly and severally, a total sum of Rs.26,19,193/- (Rupees

¶69

Twenty Six Lakhs Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Ninety Three only) as follows:

¶70

¶71

¶72

Uploaded in E-Drt at 11:32 a.m., on 03.08.2026

¶73

O.A. No. 258 of 2024

¶74

03.08.2026

¶75

¶76

(b) The sum of Rs.24,73,000/- realized by way of sale under SARFAESI Act is directed to be given credit to the borrower’s loan account as on the date of realisation.

¶77

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

¶78

(d) 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 Defendant 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 Defendant to the applicant bank.

¶79

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

¶80

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

¶81

Uploaded in E-Drt at 11:32 a.m., on 03.08.2026

¶82

O.A. No. 258 of 2024

¶83

¶84

03.08.2026

¶85

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

¶86

Sd/-

¶87

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

¶88

(Dictated to Steno (Suriya), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 03^rd day of August, 2026)

¶89

ANNEXURES

¶90

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶91

AW-1: Mr. S. Surender, Deputy Manager of the Applicant Bank.

¶92

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶93

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	Loan application dated 06.10.2021.	A-1
2.	Arrangement Letter dated 08.11.2021.	A-2
3.	Agreement of Mortgage dated 08.11.2021.	A-3
4.	Memorandum of Loan Agreement for Home Loan Granted to Public dated 08.11.2021.	A-4
5.	Affidavit by defendant dated 08.11.2021.	A-5
6.	Application for loan of Rs.66000.00 dated 10.11.2021.	A-6
7.	Agreement of Loan for insurance amount of Rs.66000.00 dated 16.11.2021.	A-7
8.	Statement of Housing Loan A/c no.40567119151 till 01/09/2025	A-8
9.	Statement of Term Loan A/c no.40567119151 till 01/09/2025	A-9

¶94

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶95

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶96

Uploaded in E-Drt at 11:32 a.m., on 03.08.2026

¶97

O.A. No. 258 of 2024

03.08.2026

:- SCHEDULE -:

Mortgaged property has been sold under the SARFAESI Act.

¶102

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

¶103

Uploaded in E-Drt at 11:32 a.m., on 03.08.2026

State Bank of India v. Latheef

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Latheef

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

Vinod Sharma versus Karur Vysya Bank

Challani Ranka Jewellery versus Indian Overseas Bank

State Bank of India versus Noushad

Axis Bank versus Msm Enterprises

Karur Vysya Bank versus Arunachalam

Indian Overseas Bank versus Satish Kumar