Allowed

State Bank of India v. Buchappa Fuels

DRT6 Jan 2026OA/259/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the original application filed by State Bank of India against three defendants. The court permitted recovery of a term loan principal, interest, and penal interest, and authorized sale of property assets to satisfy the dues.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 37,81,163.46 with interest and costs; liberty granted to recover balance dues by sale of scheduled immovable properties and personal assets of the defendants.

State Bank of India versus Buchappa Fuels — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2026)

¶1

O.A. No. 259 of 2024

¶2

06.01.2026

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 06^th day of January, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 259 of 2024

¶8

State Bank of India, SARB-II, Chennai, No. 44, 1^st Floor, Eldams Road, Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018, Represented by its Dy. Mananger.

¶9

…. Applicant

¶10

-Vs-

¶11

M/s. Buchappa Fuels,

¶12

Rep. by its Proprietor,

¶13

Mr. Sivashankar Buchappa,

¶14

No. 1, Jangalapalayam Village,

¶15

Pachappanatty Village,

¶16

Denkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District,

¶17

Tamil Nadu – 635 107.

¶18

Mr. Sivashankar Buchappa, S/o. Buchappa, R/o. No. 105/23, Ganesha Colony,

¶19

Kelamangalam,

¶20

Denkanikottai Taluk,

¶21

Krishnagiri District,

¶22

Tamil Nadu – 635 113.

¶23

Mrs. Mangalagowri, W/o. Buchappa,

¶24

No. 105/23, Ganesha Colony,

¶25

Kelamangalam,

¶26

Denkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District,

¶27

Tamil Nadu – 635 113. …. Defendants

¶28

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶29

Counsel for Applicant : Sh. S. Vaidhyanathan

¶30

Defendants 1 to 3 were set ex-parte on 26.11.2024

¶31

O.A. No. 259 of 2024

¶32

¶33

06.01.2026

¶34

: - FINAL ORDER - :

¶35

This Original Application is filed on 06.02.2024 by the Applicant Bank under Section 19 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 sum of Rs.37,81,163.46p (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakhs Eighty One Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Three and Forty Six Paise only) due in respect of Term Loan (Account No.37614684741) repayable together with further interest @ 11.45% p.a. with monthly rests plus penal interest @2%p.a. from the date of Application till the date of realization in full, for sale of schedule mentioned immovable property and for costs of this Original Application.

¶36

Brief Facts of the case:

¶37

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.

¶38

It is the case of the applicant bank that the Defendants had approached the Applicant Bank at Kelamangam, Denkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District, requesting for a Term Loan for the business of Petroleum Dealership at Pachapanatty Village and submitted Application dated 17.03.2018.

¶39

O.A. No. 259 of 2024

¶40

¶41

06.01.2026

¶42

It is submitted by the applicant bank that considering the said request, the Applicant Bank had sanctioned Tem Loan of Rs.28 lakhs on 26.03.2018. In order to secure the loan, the Defendants have executed the following documents on 26.03.2018 in favour of the Applicant:

¶43

i. Letter of Arrangement

¶44

ii. Agreement of Loan cum Hypothecation

¶45

iii. Guarantee agreement executed by D-3 offering Personal guarantee for the credit facility.

¶46

The Applicant submits that the facility was to be repaid in 114 instalments of Rs.24562/- each from 07.09.2018, together with interest at 11.90% per annum, with interest to be serviced as and when applied in the account. Defendants had agreed to route all the proceeds of business through their account, and to maintain sufficient stocks to cover the drawings in the account.

¶47

It is submitted by the applicant bank that in order to secure the loan, the 3^rd Defendant deposited the title deeds dated 09.08.1995 registered Doc. No. 20241/1995 and dated 28.09.1998 registered as Doc.No.1844/1998 with SRO, Kelamangalam, for the property mentioned in Item I and II in the OA Schedule, as security for the loan availed by D-

¶48

1 represented by D-2 and had executed Memorandum of deposit of Title deeds dated 23.03.2018 registered as Doc.No.2357/2018.

¶49

The Applicant submits that further D-3 had also executed Form-A dated 28.12.2021 confirming the deposit of original title deeds as stated

¶50

O.A. No. 259 of 2024

¶51

06.01.2026

¶52

¶53

above for creation of security of the property in favour of the Applicant Bank.

¶54

The Applicant submits that after availing the Term Loan, the Defendants have not honoured the terms of the Agreement and have not carried out the business in terms of the agreement and did not route the proceeds of business through their account with the Bank. There is also no stock to cover the dues of the Bank and the Defendants have since closed down their business and no stocks are available to cover the dues.

¶55

The Applicant submits that 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) on 25.03.2020 as per RBI Norms. The Applicant Bank through its Authorised Officer had issued Demand notice dated 02.09.2021 to the Defendants under the SARFAESI Act, followed by Possession notice dated 06.11.2021, but the Defendants have not come forward to repay their dues. In the above circumstances, the Applicant Bank has filed the above OA for recovery of Rs. 37,81,163.46p from the defendants

¶56

After the filing of the OA, summons were sent to the Defendants 1 to 3 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, which is served to the defendants 1 to 3. When OA was taken up on 26.11.2024, even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, Defendants 1 to 3 were placed ex-parte on

¶57

O.A. No. 259 of 2024

06.01.2026

26.11.2024.

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶62

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Sh. Jitin Anto, Dy. Manager, SARB II, Chennai, 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-12 . 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.

¶63

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:

¶64

: O R D E R :

¶65

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶66

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the defendants 1 to 3, jointly and severally for recovery of a total sum of Rs. Rs.37,81,163.46p (Rupees Thirty Seven Lakhs Eighty One Thousand One Hundred and Sixty Three and Forty Six Paise only) due in respect of Term Loan (Account No.37614684741) repayable together with further interest @ 11.45% p.a. with monthly rests plus penal interest @2%p.a. from the date of Application till the date of realization in full

¶67

O.A. No. 259 of 2024

¶68

06.01.2026

¶69

¶70

along with costs of this application.

¶71

(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 immovable properties morefully detailed in the OA schedule.

¶72

¶73

(e) If the sale proceeds of the immovable properties are 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.

¶74

(f) 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 Defendants to the applicant bank.

¶75

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

¶76

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

¶77

O.A. No. 259 of 2024

¶78

06.01.2026

¶79

¶80

Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

¶81

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

¶82

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

¶83

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 06^th

¶84

day of January, 2026)

¶85

ANNEXURES

¶86

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶87

AW-1: Sh. Jitin Anto, Dy. Manager representing the Applicant Bank

¶88

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶89

Sl. No.	Date	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	17.03.2018	Loan Application	A-1
2.	26.03.2018	Arrangement Letter	A-2
3.	26.03.2018	Agreement of Loan cum Hypothecation	A-3
4.	26.03.2018	Guarantee Agreement by D-3	A-4
5.	23.03.3028	^{Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds} registered as Doc. No. 2357/2018	A-5
6.	09.08.1995	^{Sale Deed in favour of D-3 registered} as Doc. No. 2031/1995	A-6
7.	28.09.1998	^{Sale Deed in favour of D-3 registered} as Doc. No. 1844/1998	A-7
8.	28.11.2021	Form-A for confirming security by D-3	A-8
9.	28.07.2022	^{Letter by D-2 agreeing to repay the} loan	A-9
10.	02.09.2021	Demand Notice	A-10
11.	06.11.2021	Possession Notice	A-11
12.	--	Statement of OD A/c. No. 37614684741 from 26.03.2018 to 29.01.2024

¶90

Witness Examined for the Defendants

¶91

: -Nil-

¶92

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants : -Nil –

¶93

O.A. No. 259 of 2024

06.01.2026

:-SCHEDULE-:

Item No. 1:

In Kelamangalam Village of Denkanikottai Taluk, Krishnagiri District attached to Registration District of Krishnagiri and Sub Registration District of Kelamangalam bearing Kelamangalam Village, Survey No. 178/2B, Dry Ext. Hec.0.01.2, Asst. Rs.1.10 this bounded on the

¶99

East by : 12 feet common passage West by : Item No. 2 and also property of Munirathnamma North by : Common Passage South by : House of Kanniappan

¶100

Within these Boundaries Measuring:

¶101

East to West on both sides : 17 feet North to South on both sides : 30 feet Total : 510 Sq.ft. (vacant site)

¶102

Item No. 2:

¶103

Survey No. 178/2A1, Dry. Ext. Ac.0.67, in this new Sub Division Survey No. 178/22A/1G2B3 in this bounded on the

¶104

East by : Item No. 1 property belongs to Mangalagowramma West by : House of Venkataramaiah Shetty North by : Road South by : House of Kanniappan

¶105

Within these Boundaries Measuring:

¶106

East to West on both sides : 17 feet North to South on both sides : 30 feet Total : 510 Sq.ft. (vacant site)

¶107

O.A. No. 259 of 2024

¶108

¶109

06.01.2026

¶110

The above two Survey Nos. making Total 1020 Sq.ft. in this containing RCC Terraced building comprising Ground Floor & First Floor and II Floor also, with Door No. 42/2 in Ganesh Colony.

¶111

Sd/-

¶112

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

State Bank of India v. Buchappa Fuels

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Buchappa Fuels

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

S v Civcons Private Limited versus Deustche Bank

Srinivasan R versus Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited

Bank of Baroda versus Ravi Coconut Traders

Punjab National Bank versus Felix Arokiarajan

Kanniyappan N and Dharageswari K versus Dcb Bank Limited

State Bank of India versus Ramanathan