Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S Cozee Box Out

DRT8 Jul 2026TA/1365/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by a bank for recovery of a defaulting loan amount of Rs. 22,02,923/- along with interest and costs. The court confirmed the validity of the security documents and the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, ordering the recovery from the defendants' personal assets if hypothecated assets prove insufficient.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 22,02,923/- with interest and costs; liberty to sell hypothecated and personal assets of the proprietor respondent.

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/S Cozee Box Out — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A. No.1365 of 2023

¶2

08.07.2026

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 08^th day of July, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

TRANSFERRED APPLICATION No.1365 of 2023

¶8

(Originally filed before DRT- II, Chennai as OA No.514 of 2020 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.1365 of 2023)

¶9

M/s Indian Overseas Bank, Nandanam branch, No.6, 5^th Main Road, Nandhanam Extn, Near Venkateswara hospital, Chennai- 600035 Rep by its Manager & Constituted Attorney

¶10

…Applicant

¶11

-Vs-

¶12

M/s Cozee Box Out,

¶13

Rep by its Prop. Navajoth Singh,

¶14

35/40, TMM Street,

¶15

Vannadurai, Thiruvanmiyur,

¶16

Chennai- 600 041

¶17

Mr.Navajoth Singh,

¶18

S/o Dal Jeethi Singh,

¶19

58/4, 1^st Main Road, Besant Nagar, Chennai- 600 090 ….Defendants

¶20

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶21

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. K. Radhakrishnamurthy

¶22

Defendants 1 and 2 were set ex-parte on 22.08.2022

¶23

: - FINAL ORDER- :

¶24

This Original Application is filed on 03.03.2020 by the applicant

¶25

bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act,

¶26

Uploaded on 08.07.2026 at 15:00 hours

¶27

T.A. No.1365 of 2023

¶28

¶29

08.07.2026

¶30

against the defendant 1 and 2, jointly and severally for recovery of a total sum of Rs.22,02,923/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs Two Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty Three only) due in respect of Cash Credit facility (A/c No.292233000000002) repayable together with further interest @13.20% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full, for sale of schedule mentioned hypothecated assets and for costs of this OA.

¶31

Originally, this Application was filed before DRT-II, Chennai, assigned OA No.514 of 2020, and thereafter in pursuance to the notification from Ministry of Finance, DFS dated 04.10.2022, OA No.514 of 2020 stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.1365 of 2023.

¶32

Brief Facts of the case:

¶33

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.

¶34

The applicant submits that the 1^st defendant was carrying restaurant business. The 2^nd defendant had executed all the documents behalf of the 1^st defendant.

¶35

It is the case of the applicant bank that the First defendant is a Proprietorship concern wherein the second defendant is its Sole Proprietor, who was carrying on restaurant business. At the request of

¶36

Uploaded on 08.07.2026 at 15:00 hours

¶37

T.A. No.1365 of 2023

¶38

¶39

08.07.2026

¶40

the first defendant by their application dated 13.06.2016, the applicant sanctioned Cash Credit Limit against Hypothecation of Stocks to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/- to the first defendant vide Sanction Letter dated 25.06.2016. The 1^st defendant availed the Cash Credit limit of Rs. 20,00,000/- on 25.06.2016 and executed the following documents on the same day in favour of the applicant bank:

¶41

a) Demand Promissory Note for Rs.20 lakhs promising to repay the amount together with interest thereon at 11.20% p.a. compounded monthly rest subject to reserve Bank of India/Bank rates may be revised from time to time.

¶42

b) Letter of Continuity Security

¶43

c) Letter of Hypothecation

¶44

The applicant submits that at the request of the defendants, the applicant bank had renewed the loan by way of sanction dated 28.09.2017.

¶45

It is submitted by the applicant bank that subsequent to availing of loan, the operation of the account by the defendants was not satisfactory. Inspite of several demands made to the defendants, they did not regularize the account. However the first defendant had executed a Revival Letter dated 13.06.2019, wherein they acknowledged their liabilities. In view of continuous default, the loan account was classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 31.08.2019. The applicant bank made several demands to the defendants to repay the loan outstanding but there was no response and no repayment. The applicant also sent

¶46

Uploaded on 08.07.2026 at 15:00 hours

¶47

T.A. No.1365 of 2023

¶48

08.07.2026

¶49

¶50

Demand Notice dated 26.12.2019 to the defendants but there was no response.

¶51

The applicant states that as on 29.02.2020 the balance outstanding is Rs.22,02,923/- in respect of the loan account. TThe present rate of interest on the outstanding is 13.20% p.a. with monthly rests (including 2% penal interest). 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 recovery of its dues from the defendants.

¶52

After the filing of the OA, summons were sent to the Defendants 1 and 2 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, which was returned with postal endorsement as ‘Left’ respect of D-1, while summons to D-2 returned as ‘No such person’. Applicant Bank had caused paper publication of the notice and filed proof thereof. When OA was taken up on 22.08.2022 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, Defendants 1 and 2 were placed ex-parte on 22.08.2022.

¶53

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶54

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Mr. Sourabh Kumar, Manager and Constituted Attorney 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.

¶55

Uploaded on 08.07.2026 at 15:00 hours

¶56

T.A. No.1365 of 2023

¶57

08.07.2026

¶58

¶59

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.

¶60

The defendants were set ex-parte on 22.08.2022, 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.

¶61

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:

¶62

: O R D E R :

¶63

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶64

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendants

¶65

Uploaded on 08.07.2026 at 15:00 hours

¶66

T.A. No.1365 of 2023

¶67

08.07.2026

¶68

¶69

1 and 2 jointly and severally, severally for recovery of a total sum Rs.22,02,923/- (Rupees Twenty Two Lakhs Two Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty Three only) due in respect of Cash Credit facility (A/c No.292233000000002) repayable together with further interest @13.20% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full, along with costs of this application.

¶70

(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 assets morefully detailed in the OA schedule.

¶71

¶72

(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.

¶73

(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

¶74

Uploaded on 08.07.2026 at 15:00 hours

¶75

T.A. No.1365 of 2023

¶76

08.07.2026

¶77

¶78

prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by Defendants to the applicant bank.

¶79

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

¶80

(g) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the 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 Roshnee, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 08^th day of July, 2026)

¶84

ANNEXURES

¶85

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶86

AW-1: Mr. Sourabh Kumar, Manager and Constituted Attorney of the Applicant Bank

¶87

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶88

Sl. No.	Date	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	13.06.2016	Application bydebts	A-1
2.	25.06.2016	Sanction letter byapplicant	A-2
3.	25.06.2016	Demand promissory notice for Rs.20lakhs bydefendants	A-3
4.	25.06.2016	Letter of continuing security by the defendants	A-4
5.	25.06.2016	Letter of hypothecation bydefendants	A-5
6.	28.09.2017	Sanction letter byapplicant	A-6
7.	13.06.2019	Revival letter byapplicant	A-7

¶89

Uploaded on 08.07.2026 at 15:00 hours

¶90

T.A. No.1365 of 2023

¶91

¶92

08.07.2026

¶93

8.	26.12.2019	Demand notice byapplicant	A-8
9.		Certified statement of account	A-9

¶94

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶95

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶96

:-SCHEDULE OF HYPOTEHCATED PROPERTY-:

¶97

All the hypothecated stocks i.e. goods such as furniture & fixtures, machineries, vehicles, stocks, books debts, receivables etc and other hypothecated items related to the restaurant are lying at the first defendant premises i.e.35/40, TMM street, Vannadurai, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai- 600 041 or stored or to be stored or transit or wherever found.

¶98

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

¶99

Uploaded on 08.07.2026 at 15:00 hours

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S Cozee Box Out

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. M/S Cozee Box Out

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

Idbi Bank versus Godwin

Dr.PrakashKarrun and Dr.Veena Singh versus Idbi Bank

Bothiramakrishnan versus Indian Overseas Bank

Bank of Baroda versus Srinivasan

State Bank of India versus M/S Artcrafts

Karur Vysya Bank versus M/S R P S Logistics