Allowed

Axis Bank v. N Lakshmi

DRT9 Feb 2026OA/281/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT-III, Chennai allowed an Original Application filed by Axis Bank Ltd. for recovery of outstanding dues along with interest from four defendants who were repaid a working capital facility and defaulted on the same. The application was tried in absence of respondents and was allowed with costs.

What did the court decide?

Allowed recovery of total sum of Rs.38,88,812.07 with further interest @ 13.15% p.a. and penal interest @ 2% per month from date of filing till realization along with costs.

Axis Bank versus N Lakshmi — Money Laundering | DRT (2026)

¶1

O.A. No. 281 of 2022

¶2

09.02.2026

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 09^th day of February, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 281 of 2022

¶8

Axis Bank Ltd.

¶9

Retail Asset Centre, No.6, St. Ange Street, 1^st Floor, Pondicherту - 605 001

¶10

Represented by its Authorized Signatory

¶11

….Applicant

¶12

-Vs-

¶13

M/s.Krishnaa Agency Proprietor -N.Lakshmi R.S.147/3, Pillaiyar Kuppam Revenue Village Bahour Commune, Pondicherry - 607 402.

¶14

N.Lakshmi

¶15

W/o.Narayanan

¶16

No.77, Pillaiyar Kuppam Street, Kirumampakkam, Pondicherry - 607 402.

¶17

Narayanan S/o.Muthukrishnan No.77, Pillaiyar Kuppam Street, Kirumampakkam, Pondicherry - 607 402.

¶18

Pannerselvam

¶19

S/o Sundaram No.44, Rice Mill Road Kammiyampettai, Kondur,

¶20

Cuddalore - 607 002. …..Defendants

¶21

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶22

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. Kvp. Deepak Raj

¶23

Defendants were set ex-parte on 30.11.2022

¶24

: - FINAL ORDER - :

¶25

This Original Application is filed on 27.06.2022 by the Applicant

¶26

O.A. No. 281 of 2022

¶27

¶28

09.02.2026

¶29

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 sum of Rs.38,88,812.07p (Rupees Thirty Eight Lakhs Eighty Eight Thousand Eight Hundred and Twelve and Seven Paise Only) due in respect of Working Capital Facility (Account No.919030083188529) repayable together with further interest @ 13.15% p.a. with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% per month, from the date of filing the OA, till date of realization in full and for costs of this application.

¶30

Brief Facts of the case:

¶31

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.

¶32

It is the case of the applicant bank that the 1^st Defendant is a Proprietary concern represented by its Proprietrix 2^nd Defendant herein. 1^st defendant represented by 2^nd defendant had approached the Applicant Bank for a Working Capital Facility by submitting Loan Application on 23.09.2019.

¶33

The applicant bank submits that based on the documents furnished by the 1^st Defendant, the Applicant Bank had sanctioned the said Facility on 12.10.2019 for a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- vide Loan Account

¶34

O.A. No. 281 of 2022

¶35

¶36

09.02.2026

¶37

No.919030083188529, which was repayable on Demand.

¶38

It is submitted by the applicant bank that the 1^st Defendant had executed all the necessary Loan documents on 24.10.2019 for an amount of Rs.30,00,000/- and agreed to pay interest at the rate of 14.55% per annum.

¶39

The applicant bank submits that the 1^st Defendant had entered into Facility Agreement along with the Demand Promissory Note on 24.10.2019, for an amount of Rs.30,00,000/-and agreed to repay the same in 12 monthly instalments along with interest at the rate of 14.55%

¶40

per annum. The 1^st Defendant had also executed a Deed of Hypothecation for an amount of Rs.30,00,000/- on 24.10.2019.

¶41

The applicant bank further submits that the Defendants 2 to 4 stood as Guarantors for the due repayment of the above mentioned loan and had signed as Guarantors in the Deed of Guarantee for an amount of Rs.30,00,000/- on 24.10.2019.

¶42

It is submitted that subsequent to availing of aforesaid loan, the defendants did not repay the loan amount, except for a few repayments which was not sufficient for maintaining the account and hence the account became irregular and the Loan Account has been declared as Non Performing Asset (NPA) on 30.11.2020. When matter stood thus, the Applicant bank issued a Legal notice dated 01.06.2022 to the defendants demanding the outstanding amount in respect of the loan. The notices sent to all the Defendants have been duly served. In spite of receiving the said notice the Defendants deliberately failed to repay the

¶43

O.A. No. 281 of 2022

¶44

09.02.2026

¶45

¶46

loan amount. Hence, the present Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant bank for recovery of its dues from the defendants.

¶47

After the filing of the OA, summons were sent to the Defendants 1 to 4 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, summons to defendants 1 to 3 are duly served, while summon to D4 returned unserved with postal endorsement as ‘unclaimed’. Applicant bank had caused paper publication of the notice and filed proof thereof. When OA was taken up on 30.11.2022 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, Defendants 1 to 4 were placed ex-parte on 30.11.2022.

¶48

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶49

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Sh. P. Rajesh, Authorized Signatory 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-7 .

¶50

A careful examination of the pleadings in the Proof Affidavit and documents Exhibits A-1 to A-7 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.

¶51

O.A. No. 281 of 2022

¶52

09.02.2026

¶53

¶54

The defendants were set ex-parte on 30.11.2022, 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.

¶55

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:

¶56

: O R D E R :

¶57

14. The OA is allowed with costs,

¶58

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendants jointly and severally, a total sum of Rs.38,88,812.07p (Rupees Thirty Eight Lakhs Eighty Eight Thousand Eight Hundred and Twelve and Seven Paise Only) due in respect of Working Capital Facility (Account No.919030083188529) repayable together with further interest @ 13.15% p.a. with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% per month, from the date of filing the OA, till date of realization in full along with costs. All pending IAs, if any stands closed.

¶59

O.A. No. 281 of 2022

¶60

09.02.2026

¶61

¶62

(b) 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.

¶63

¶64

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

¶65

Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

¶66

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

¶67

Sd/-

¶68

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

¶69

(Dictated to Steno (Suriya), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 09^th day of February, 2026)

¶70

ANNEXURES

¶71

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶72

AW-1: Sh. P. Rajesh, Authorized Signatory representing the Applicant Bank.

¶73

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶74

Sl.	Description of Documents	Exhibit
No.		No.
1.	Sanction Letter dated 12.10.2019.	A-1

¶75

O.A. No. 281 of 2022

¶76

09.02.2026

¶77

¶78

2.	Facility Agreement along with the Demand Promissory Note executed by the 1^stdefendant dated 24.10.2019.	A-2
3.	Deed Hypothecation executed by the 1^st defendant dated 24.10.2019.	A-3
4.	Deed of Guarantee executed by the defendants 2-4 dated 24.10.2019 and 01.06.2022.	A-4
5.	Copy of Legal Notice.	A-5
6.	Acknowledgement Cards & Returned Covers.	A-6
7.	Statement of Accounts.	A-7

¶79

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶80

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶81

:- SCHEDULE -:

¶82

-Nil –

¶83

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

Axis Bank v. N Lakshmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Axis Bank v. N Lakshmi

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

Indian Overseas Bank versus Srinivasan

Indian Overseas Bank versus M s Mmw

State Bank of India versus Veekay Cashews

Bank of Baroda versus Wilson Sargunaraj

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Mohan

Indian Overseas Bank versus M s Sakthi Engineering