Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Ggs Traders

DRT21 May 2026OA/645/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 19(3)(A)(c) of the RDB Act, the applicant bank sought disclosure of the respondents' assets. The Tribunal allowed the interim application, directing respondents to disclose all assets on oath within 15 days, noting the debt exceeded available securities without deciding merits.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to disclose all assets on oath within 15 days of receipt of this order.

Union Bank of India versus Ggs Traders — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

IA 1777/25 in OA 645/2025

¶2

21.05.2026

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 21^st day of May, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

I.A. No.1777 of 2025 in O.A. No. 645 of 2025

¶8

Union Bank of India, Chrompet Branch - 2, No.7/8A, Plot No.125, A2, 3rd Main Road, New Colony, Chrompet, Chennai - 600 044 Rep. by its Branch Manager. …..….Petitioner/Applicant

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

M/s. GGS Traders

¶11

Rep. by its Sole Proprietor Mr.H.Ghouse Bhasha, First Floor, 32, Perambur High Road, Jamalia, Chennai – 600 012

¶12

Mr.H.Ghouse Basha S/o. Hayath Basha Sole Proprietor of M/s.GGS Traders 22 60 Ammaiammal Street, Puliyanthope, Chennai - 600 012. ...Respondents/Defendants

¶13

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶14

Counsel for Applicant : M/s M. Muthuperiasamy

¶15

: - ORDER ON IA NO.1777 of 2025 - :

¶16

The Original Application is filed by the Applicant Bank against the

¶17

Defendants, seeking for recovery of money due from Defendants jointly

¶18

and severally to pay a sum of Rs.36,63,395.21p (Rupees Thirty Six

¶19

Lakhs Sixty Three Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Five and

¶20

IA 1777/25 in OA 645/2025

¶21

21.05.2026

¶22

¶23

Twenty One Paise only) repayable together with further interest and costs.

¶24

The Applicant Bank has filed the present petition i.e., I.A.No.1777/2025 with affidavit of the Authorised Signatory of applicant bank, praying to pass an order directing the Respondent/Defendant to disclose by affidavit, of his other assets such as movable and immovable properties (with description of the said assets/properties), bank accounts, lockers, fixed deposits with the banks, Companies and other financial/nonbanking financial companies, life insurance policies, mutual funds, bonds both in material and dematerialized forms, securities, copies of income tax and wealth tax returns and other financial details including lease/sale/purchase agreements of the other properties pending disposal of the O.A.

¶25

It is the case of applicant bank that the OA has been filed for recovery of amount due from Respondents / Defendants arising out of Cash Credit facility under “Union Progress Scheme” on 11.07.2022. It is submitted that the respondents neither repaid the loan amounts, except for a few repayments, which was not sufficient for maintaining the loan account. Hence the loan account was declared as NPA on 28.01.2025. the applicant bank had issued Legal Notice on 15.05.2025, despite which the defendants did not come forward to repay the dues. Hence the applicant bank had filed OA No.645/2025 for recovery of its dues from defendants.

¶26

IA 1777/25 in OA 645/2025

¶27

¶28

21.05.2026

¶29

It is further submitted by the applicant bank that the value of securities is around Rs.13,50,000/- as against the outstanding dues of Rs.36,63,395.21p, resulting in a portion of the outstanding dues unsecured. On discreet enquiry and on verification, it is given to understand that the respondents /defendants are owing several other immovable properties but the same has not been disclosed at the time of availing of the above said loan. Hence the present application is filed praying to direct the respondents to disclose the assets owned by them in order to effectively recover its legitimate dues.

¶30

Heard the counsel for applicant bank and perused the records of produced along with the IA.

¶31

The Applicant Bank had filed the above I.A. on the premise that the respondents /defendants are owing several other immovable properties but the same has not been disclosed at the time of availing of the above said loan. Hence the applicant bank prayed to direct the respondents to disclose the assets owned by them in order to effectively recover its legitimate dues, as the portion of the debt is unsecured.

¶32

It is a matter of record that the OA was filed for recovery of sum of Rs.36,63,395.21p which is a colossal sum of money. Considering the amount of claim involved in this case and the balance of convenience, the present IA is to be allowed by keeping open the merits of the case and without prejudice to the rights of both the parties. By doing so, no prejudice, no harm and loss will be caused to the Defendants.

¶33

IA 1777/25 in OA 645/2025

¶34

21.05.2026

¶35

¶36

As per Section 19 (3)(A)(c) of RDB Act,

¶37

“If the estimated value of such other assets is not sufficient to recover the debt, seek an order directing the defendants to disclose to the Tribunal, particulars of other properties or assets owned by the defendants.”

¶38

As the Applicant Bank had prima facie established the essential ingredients for directing the respondents / defendants to disclose all their assets on oath, this Tribunal proceeds to pass the following order:

¶39

:ORDER:

¶40

In the circumstances pleaded, respondents / defendants are

¶41

hereby directed to disclose all their assets on oath within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.

¶42

The Registry is directed to issue notice to the respondents along with copy of this order.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

21^st day of May, 2026)

Union Bank of India v. Ggs Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Ggs Traders

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

Sindhuja Modern Dall and Rice Mills versus 201

Bank of India versus M/S Agma Foundations Private Limited

Bank of Maharashtra versus M/S Reflection Investment

Canara Bank versus C P Sudharson

Canara Bank versus R G Enterprises Rep By Mr R Sathish And two Others

Punjab National Bank versus Shalini Sathishbabu