Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Ms. Vidot Sheila Agnes

DRT12 Jan 2026TA/233/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an applicant bank's application for a Recovery Certificate under the RDB Act. The court found the bank proved the claim for personal loan and credit card dues. A part satisfaction regarding the credit card was recorded, and the applicant was directed to realize the outstanding balance along with interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued permitting realization of Rs.29,37,864.73 plus interest at 10.99% per annum from the defendant until full realization.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Ms. Vidot Sheila Agnes — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II AT CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 12^th day of January, 2026

¶3

PRESENT: SHRI SHARANG DHAR UPADHYAY PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

TA No.233 of 2022

¶5

(Originally filed before DRT-I Chennai as OA No.139 of 2022 and thereafter Transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.233 of 2022)

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited No.128, Nelson Manickam Road East West Centre, Ground Floor Aminjikarai, Chennai – 600 029

¶7

Also at “CEEBROS” 110, Nelson Manickam Road 4^th Floor, Aminjikarai, Chennai – 600 029 Represented by its Authorized Signatory Mr. P. Nirmalraj

¶8

…Applicant

¶9

Versus

¶10

Ms. Vidot Sheila Agnes W/o Vidot James No.3C, East Lyn Fairmount Garden Mount Poonamallee Road Manapakkam, Near MIOT Hospital Chennai – 600 089

¶11

Also at F#Plaza, Laceleste Netaji Street Rajarajeswari Nagar, Madanadapuram Mugalivakkam, Porur Chennai – 600 125

¶12

Also at MIOT Hospitals No.4/112, Mount Poonamallee Road Manapakkam, Chennai – 600 089.

¶13

... Defendant

¶14

¶15

Counsels on Record / Appeared

¶16

Counsel for Applicant Bank : M/s T.K.M. Sai Krishnan Defendants ex-parte on 20.09.2023

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

This application is filed by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendant seeking issuance of a Recovery Certificate for recovery of a sum of Rs.29,37,864.73p together with interest at the rate of 10.99% per annum

¶19

being the amount due under Loan Account No.50822232 and a sum of Rs.7,99,152.76p being the amount due under the Credit Card Account from the date of the application till the date of realisation along with costs of the application.

¶20

The subject matter of the case is the Personal Loan and Credit Card dues availed by the defendant from the Applicant Bank.

¶21

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant approached the applicant bank for grant of personal loan by submitting Loan Application dated 6.9.2017 and considering the said request the applicant sanctioned a personal loan of Rs.50,00,000/- to the defendant on 14.09.2017 repayable in 67 equated monthly installments of Rs.1,08,687/- each commencing from 7.10.2017 till 07.04.2023. It is stated that the defendant executed the loan agreement on 14.09.2017.

¶22

¶23

It is also the case of the applicant that the defendants were highly irregular in repayments. It is the case of the applicant that having availed the loan the defendant defaulted in repayment and failed to regularize the loan account despite repeated request and hence the applicant issued a legal notice dated 21.04.2021, however the said notices returned unserved with remarks “No such Person”, “Left”, “No such Person” respectively.

¶24

It is the further case of the applicant that the defendant approached the applicant bank for a Credit Card Facility by submitting application dated 18.05.2015 and the credit card was issued on 19.5.2015 with a credit card limit of Rs.4,00,000/-. The defendant after utilizing the card failed to pay the amounts due to the applicant bank on due dates. Therefore, the applicant issued a legal notice on 21.4.2021 calling upon the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.8,35,807.02p and the said notice returned with endorsement “Left” at all addresses. Despite the said notice the defendant did not come forward to clear the dues. Hence the applicant is filing this OA for recovery of its dues.

¶25

6.. Summons was taken out to the defendant returned unserved and hence was served with notice by way of substituted service by causing paper publication. As there was no representation on behalf of the defendant continuously and on 20.09.2023, the defendant was called absent and placed ex-parte on that day. Applicant Bank filed Proof Affidavit along with

¶26

¶27

14 documents, which were marked as Ex. A-1 to A-14 on 19.02.2024. The Ld. Counsel for Applicant Bank made his submissions on 11.12.2025 and thereafter the matter stood till this date for passing final orders.

¶28

The following issues arise for consideration in the matter: -

¶29

(a) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the liability of the defendant?

¶30

(b) What order as to cost of the proceedings need be passed?

¶31

These issues are considered together.

¶32

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the applicant, perused the OA averments and the record placed before the Tribunal.

¶33

The evidence of the applicant is led by AW1 who produced the documents Exhibit A-1 to A-14 along with the proof affidavit. The documents produced in evidence are all found admissible. The proof affidavit of the applicant bank remained unchallenged and unrebutted. Therefore, on careful consideration of proof affidavit along with exhibits filed on behalf of the applicant bank, besides the material placed before the Tribunal, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant bank has successfully proved the OA claim against the defendant. Further, the statement of accounts in respect of the loan account produced and certified under the Banker’s Book

¶34

¶35

Evidence Act, clearly indicates that the amount claimed by the applicant is due from the defendant. It is clear from the statement of accounts that penal interest is not capitalized.

¶36

In view of the foregoing, it is clearly evident that the application filed by the applicant bank is well within the period of limitation and this Tribunal possesses the territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain this OA.

¶37

During the pendency of the TA, the applicant bank had filed a part satisfaction memo stating therein that the applicant had settled the credit card account by remitting a sum of Rs.1,45,000/- and prayed for recording part satisfaction of the TA claim. The part satisfaction memo filed by the applicant is taken on record and part satisfaction of the TA claim for a sum of Rs.1,45,000/- was recorded on 08.11.2023. In the said memo the applicant prayed the Tribunal to determine only the debt towards the loan account No.50822232 from the total claim amount filed in the TA.

¶38

In view of the fact that the loan facility availed by the defendant is a Personal Loan this Tribunal is not inclined to interfere with the interest prayed for.

¶39

In view of the afore mentioned discussions, the only conclusion this Tribunal can draw is that the applicant had clearly proved the

¶40

¶41

disbursement of the loan, which the applicant is entitled to realize. Hence,

¶42

OA is disposed off in the following manner: -

¶43

(a) TA No.233 of 2022 stands allowed.

¶44

(b) Applicant is permitted to realize a sum of Rs.29,37,864.73 together with interest at the date of 10.99% per annum from the date of filing of the application till the date of realization in full, from the defendant after deducting all the amounts received / realized by them during the pendency of OA and also by selling the other assets of the defendant.

¶45

¶46

(d) Applicant is permitted to realize cost of the proceedings and shall file cost memo within 15 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

¶47

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

¶48

¶49

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶50

Sd/(SHARANG DHAR UPADHYAY) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, CHENNAI

¶51

(Dictated to PS, who typed in the system directly, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this 12^th day of January, 2026)

¶52

EXHIBITS MARKED BY APPLICANT BANK

¶53

S. No.	Date	Description of Documents	Exhibit Nos.
1.	06.09.2017	Loan Application towards the Loan Account No.50822232.	A-1
2.	14.09.2017	Loan Agreement cum Key Fact Statement	A-2
3.	13.07.2018	Legal Notice with respect to loan account No.50822232.	A-3
4.	23.04.2021	Returned Cover of the legal notice (1^staddress)	A-4
5.	23.04.2021	Returned cover of the legal notice(2^ndaddress)	A-5
6.	23.04.2021	Returned cover of the legal notice (3^rdaddress)	A-6
7.	18.05.2015	Credit Card Application form	A-7
8.		Card Member Agreement and Most important terms and conditions	A-8
9.	21.04.2021	Legal notice with respect to Credit Card Loan	A-9
10.	11.05.2021	Returned cover of the legal notice (1^staddress)	A-10
11.	10.05.2021	Returned cover of the legal notice (2^ndaddress)	A-11
12.	13.05.2021	Returned cover of the legal notice (3^rdaddress)	A-12

¶54

¶55

13.	20.04.2021 Statement of Accounts – Loan Account	A-13
	No.50822232.
14.	22.07.2021 Statement of Accounts – Credit Card Account	A-14

¶56

Sd/- (SHARANG DHAR UPADHYAY) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, CHENNAI

¶57

DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY

¶58

NIL

¶59

Sd/(SHARANG DHAR UPADHYAY) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, CHENNAI

¶60

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Ms. Vidot Sheila Agnes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Ms. Vidot Sheila Agnes

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

State Bank of India versus Krishnan Ponnambalam

M Lakshmi Priya versus Bank of Baroda

Venus Exports versus Bank of Baroda

D Murugesan versus Indian Overseas Bank

C Jaichand versus State Bank of India

Idbi Bank Limited versus M Durairajan @ Durairajan