Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Skp Enterprises

DRT10 Jul 2026OA/79/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application for recovery of dues of Rs.25,79,514/- from the confronted respondents for bona fide term loan and cash credit accounts classified as NPAs, confirming the debt and authorizing the sale of hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of total sum of Rs.25,79,514/- with interest at 12.05% p.a. from respondents jointly and severally; liberty to sell hypothecated and personal assets for balance dues.

Bank of Baroda versus Skp Enterprises — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

O.A. No.79 of 2024

¶2

10.07.2026

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 10^th day of July, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.79 of 2024

¶8

Bank of Baroda, Erstwhile Dena Bank Thandalam Branch, Madha Medical College Campus, Kundrathur Main Road, Thandalam- 600 122 Sriperumpudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District Represented by its Authorized Signatory ….Applicant

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

M/s SKP Enterprises,

¶11

Represented by its Proprietor,

¶12

Mr.M.R.Sasikumar S/o M.Rajendran,

¶13

Plot No.158, Riverside Road, Vasudevan Nagar,

¶14

Jafferkhanpet, Chennai- 600 083

¶15

Mr. M.R. Sasikumar, S/o M. Rajendran, No.49/2 Kabilar Street, MGR Street, Chennai- 600 078 …..Defendants

¶16

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶17

Counsel for Applicant: M/s. R. Kumararaja

¶18

Defendants 1 and 2 were set ex-parte on 24.04.2024

¶19

: - FINAL ORDER- :

¶20

This Original Application is filed on 09.10.2023 by the applicant

¶21

bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993

¶22

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

¶23

O.A. No.79 of 2024

¶24

¶25

10.07.2026

¶26

(formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993) against the defendants 1 and 2, jointly and severally for recovery of a total sum of Rs.25,79,514/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Seventy Nine Thousand Five Hundred and Fourteen only) as follows:

¶27

(i) A sum of Rs.16,88,414/- due in respect of Term Loan (A/c No.86510500000009) repayable together with further interest @12.05% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full;

¶28

(ii) A sum of Rs.8,91,000/- due in respect of Cash Credit limit (A/c No.86510600000139) repayable together with further interest @12.05% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full;

¶29

for sale of hypothecated movables morefully mentioned in the schedule A and B to the OA and for costs of this OA.

¶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 represented by the 2^nd defendant as its Proprietor availed Term Loan Limit of Rs.10,00,000/- on and from 20.11.2020 and Cash Credit Limit of

¶33

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

¶34

O.A. No.79 of 2024

¶35

¶36

10.07.2026

¶37

Rs.15,00,000/- on and from 20.11.2020 as evident from the respective statement of account relating to the said loans.

¶38

It is submitted by the applicant bank that to secure the Term Loan limit of Rs.10,00,000/-, the 1^st defendant represented by the 2^nd defendant as its Proprietor had executed the following security loan documents in favour of the applicant viz:

¶39

a) Demand promissory note for sole proprietorship form executed by the 1^st defendant represented by the 2^nd defendant as its proprietor on 19.11.2020 for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- in favour of the applicant promising to repay jointly and severally the said sum on demand either to the applicant or order at their office in Thandalam, Chennai- 600 122 for value received with interest thereon at the rate of 2.35% over BRLLR + SP of the bank per annum with monthly rests. Present BRLLR is 6.85% and strategic premium is 0.25% of totalling 9.45% per annum

¶40

b) Letter of installment with acceleration clause executed by the 1^st defendant represented by the 2^nd defendant as it proprietor on 19.11.2020 in favour of the applicant agreeing to repay the said loan in first 59 equal monthly instalments of payments at Rs.16,665/- per month to commence from 25.12.2020 and last 60 monthly installment to paid at Rs.16,765/- and in the event of default in repaying the instalments or over dues the defendant 1 and 2 further agreed to pay an additional interest at @% p.a. etc.

¶41

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

¶42

O.A. No.79 of 2024

¶43

10.07.2026

¶44

¶45

c) Composite hypothecation agreement (for stocks, Books/ debts/ vehicles/movable machinery/ immovable property) and power of attorney executed by the 1^st defendant represented by the 2^nd defendant as its proprietor on 19.11.2020 for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- in favour of the applicant duly hypothecating the water plant machinery as detailed in the schedule A of the original application.

¶46

d) Declaration cum undertaking cum authority executed by the 1^st defendant represented by the 2^nd defendant as its proprietor on 19.11.2020 and agreed to abide by the terms and conditions embodied there under.

¶47

The applicant submits that to secure the sanctioned Cash Credit Limit of Rs.15,00,000/-, the 1^st defendant represented by the 2^nd defendant as its Proprietor executed the following security loan documents in favour of the applicant viz:

¶48

a) Demand promissory note for sole proprietorship form executed by the 1^st defendant represented by the 2^nd defendant as its proprietor on 20.11.2020 for a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- in favour of the applicant promising to repay jointly and severally the said sum on demand either to the applicant or order at their office in Thandalam, Chennai- 600 122 for value received with interest thereon at the rate of 2.35% over BRLLR + SP of the bank per annum with monthly rests. Present BRLLR is 6.85% and strategic premium is 0.25% of totalling 9.45% per annum

¶49

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

¶50

O.A. No.79 of 2024

¶51

10.07.2026

¶52

¶53

b) Letter of sole proprietorship executed by the 2^nd defendant on 20.11.2020 in favour of the applicant undertaking sole responsibility and agreed to inform the applicant any change in the constitution of the 1^st defendant.

¶54

c) Letter of continuing security executed by 1^st defendant represented by the 2^nd defendant as its proprietor on 20.11.2020 in favour of the applicant agreeing to abide by the terms and conditions embodied therein.

¶55

d) Composite hypothecation agreement (for stocks, Books/ debts/ vehicles/movable machinery/ immovable property) and power of attorney executed by the 1^st defendant represented by the 2^nd defendant as its proprietor on 20.11.2020 for a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- in favour of the applicant duly hypothecating the water plant machinery as detailed in the schedule B of the original application.

¶56

e) Letter of authority in bank favour to disclose or publish name of borrower in case of default of loan/ advances executed by the 1^st defendant represented by the 2^nd defendant.

¶57

The applicant submits that subsequent to availing of loan, the defendants 1 and 2 failed to operate the said loan account as agreed to and were not repaying the monthly installment as well as not regularizing the over dues and in view of the continued defaults in regularizing the loan account the defendants 1 and 2 allowed both the loan accounts to be declared/classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 24.01.2022.

¶58

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

¶59

O.A. No.79 of 2024

¶60

10.07.2026

¶61

¶62

The applicant submits that in view the loan accounts i.e., Term Loan limit and Cash Credit limit being classified as Non Performing Asset, the applicant had issued request letter to the defendants 1 and 2 on 30.08.2023 requesting them to upgrade both the loan accounts, which was acknowledged by the defendants in person. The applicant submits that despite the said letter the defendants have not only failed to regularize both the loan accounts but also did not come forward to settle the said loan accounts till date.

¶63

The applicant submits that the sum due to the applicant and due by the defendants 1 and 2 is due to a statutory nationalized bank and the debt is exempted from the provisions of any of the debt relief acts. The defendants 1 and 2 are liable to pay the sums with interest accrued at the contractual rates with monthly rests or at such rates or rests as may be revised by the bank on its own or as per instruction of RBI from time to time since the loan transactions are commercial in nature. Despite repeated requests and demands, as defendants did not come forward to repay the dues, the present Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant bank for recover of its dues from the defendants.

¶64

After the filing of the OA, summons were sent to the Defendants 1 and 2 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, which was duly served in respect of D-1 and D-2. When OA was taken up on 24.04.2024 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, Defendants 1 and 2 were placed ex-parte on 24.04.2024.

¶65

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

¶66

O.A. No.79 of 2024

¶67

10.07.2026

¶68

¶69

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the

¶70

records.

¶71

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Shri. Chittimalla Rajeshwar Rao, Chief 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-14.

¶72

A careful examination of the pleadings in the Proof Affidavit and documents Exhibits A-1 to A-14 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.

¶73

The defendants were set ex-parte on 24.04.2024 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.

¶74

With regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied the

¶75

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

¶76

O.A. No.79 of 2024

¶77

¶78

10.07.2026

¶79

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:

¶80

: O R D E R :

¶81

14. The OA is allowed with costs,

¶82

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendants 1 and 2 jointly and severally, a total sum of Rs.25,79,514/(Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Seventy Nine Thousand Five Hundred and Fourteen only) as follows:

¶83

(i) A sum of Rs.16,88,414/- due in respect of Term Loan

¶84

(A/c No.86510500000009) repayable together with further interest @12.05% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full;

¶85

¶86

(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 hypothecated movables morefully detailed in the schedule A and B to the OA.

¶87

¶88

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

¶89

O.A. No.79 of 2024

¶90

¶91

10.07.2026

¶92

(d) If the sale proceeds of the hypothecated assets are not sufficient to satisfy the dues as ordered above, the applicant bank is at liberty to sell the personal assets of the 2^nd Defendant (both movable and immovable) to recover the balance dues as required under law for which the 2^nd Defendant to disclose to the Tribunal particulars of other properties or assets owned by the 2^nd Defendant.

¶93

(e) 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.

¶94

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

¶95

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

¶96

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

¶97

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

¶98

(Dictated to Roshnee, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 10^th day of July, 2026)

¶99

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

¶100

O.A. No.79 of 2024

10.07.2026

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶105

AW-1: Shri. Chittimalla Rajeshwar Rao, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank

¶106

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶107

Sl. No.	Date	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	19.11.2020	Common letter of sanction for term loan limit of Rs.10,00,000/- and cash credit limit of Rs.15,00,000/- by applicant	A-1
2.	19.11.2020	Demand promissory note by defendants 1 and 2 for Rs.10,00,000/- (term loan limit)	A-2
3.	19.11.2020	Letter of installment with acceleration clause by defendants 1 and 2 (machinery)	A-3
4.	19.11.2020	Composite hypothecation agreement by defendants 1 & 2	A-4
5.	19.11.2020	Declaration cum undertaking cum authority by defendants 1 and 2	A-5
6.	20.11.2020	Demand promissory note by defendants 1 and 2 for Rs.15,00,000/- (cash credit limit)	A-6
7.	20.11.2020	Letter of sole proprietorship by 2^nd defendant	A-7
8.	20.11.2020	Letter of continuing security by defendants 1 & 2	A-8
9.	20.11.2020	Composite hypothecation agreement by defendants 1 & 2 (stocks & book debts)	A-9
10.	20.11.2020	Letter of authority in bank favour to disclose or publish name of borrower in case of default of loan/advances	A-10
11.	23.11.2020	Invoice (machinery)	A-11
12.	30.08.2023	Request letter with acknowledgement in original by defendants 1 and 2	A-12
13.		Statement of accounts for Term Loan Limit	A-13
14.		Statement of accounts for Cash Credit Limit	A-14

¶108

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

¶109

O.A. No.79 of 2024

¶110

10.07.2026

¶111

¶112

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶113

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶114

SCHEDULE-A (MACHINERY)

¶115

Situated at No.158, Riverside road, Vasudevan Nagar, Jafferkhanpet,

¶116

Chennai- 600 083 (whole unit)

¶117

S.No	Description	Unit	Amount	GST at 5%	Total
1	Water treatment automatic grade capacity inlet flow of 10000cubic meter/hour Control systems and other digital supporting accessories	1 Nos	Rs.8,50,000/ -	Rs.42,500	Rs.8,92,500/-
2	EDI Electro Deionization unit with digital control panel Controlling unit & other robotics accessories	1 Nos	Rs.2,50,000/ -	Rs.12,500/ -	Rs.2,62,500/-
3	BOSH flow controlling assigning unit with 24 volts power partition and other accessories	1 Nos	Rs.1,75,000/ -	Rs.8550/-	Rs.1,83,550/-
	Total	Rs.	12,75,000/-	Rs.63550/ -	Rs.13,38,550 /-

¶118

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

¶119

O.A. No.79 of 2024

10.07.2026

SCHEDULE-B

Hypothecation of processed drinking water cans etc., situated at No.158, River Side Road, Vasudevan Nagar, Jafferkhanpet, Chennai- 600 083

¶124

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

¶125

Uploaded on 10.07.2026 at 13:00 hours

Bank of Baroda v. Skp Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Skp Enterprises

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

Canara Bank versus Amutharaj

Pranav Foundations Private Limited versus Idbi Bank

State Bank of India versus Vinoth

Canara Bank versus Sivagnanam

Punjab and Sind Bank versus Karunakaran

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus M S Sun Steels