Allowed

Karur Vysya Bank v. Murugappan

DRT20 Apr 2026TA/717/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Karur Vysya Bank to recover dues of Rs. 97,11,237.99 from the vehicle loan account of M/s SSRM Travels and proprietor, ordering permission to sell mortgaged properties upon failure to pay.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 97,11,237.99 with further interest and liberty to sell mortgaged properties to realize the amount.

Karur Vysya Bank versus Murugappan — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

T.A. No. 717 of 2023

¶2

20.04.2026

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 20^th day of April, 2026

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

TRANSFERRED APPLICATION No.717 of 2023

¶8

(Originally filed before DRT- II, Chennai as OA 292/2021 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No 717 of 2023)

¶9

The Karur Vysya Bank Ltd Asset and Recovery Branch Rep by its Chief Manager 2^nd Floor, No.1, Padmavathiyar road Gopalapuram, Chennai-600 086 .…Applicant

¶10

-Vs-

¶11

M/s SSRM Travels

¶12

Rep by its Proprietor Mr.S.Murugappan

¶13

Old No.10A, New no.17

¶14

Rajalakshmi nagar, 3^rd main road

¶15

Velachery, Chennai- 600 042

¶16

Mr.S.Murugappan, S/o Mr.K.R.Sivalingam

¶17

No.907, Max Worth Nagar, Kovilambakkam, Kolathur Lake backside

¶18

Near Dental College, Chennai-600 117

¶19

Also at Mr.S.Murugappan, S/o Mr.K.R.Sivalingam No.1-48, Sivakami Nagar Nachandupatti, Thirumayam Taluk

¶20

Pudukottai District-622 404 ...Defendants

¶21

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶22

Counsel for Applicant : M/s. A.Arunbabu Defendants 1 and 2 were set ex-parte on 18.05.2022

¶23

Uploaded on 20.04.2026 at 15:40 hours

¶24

T.A. No. 717 of 2023

¶25

¶26

20.04.2026

¶27

: - FINAL ORDER -:

¶28

This Original Application is filed on 22.06.2021 by the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (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.97,11,237.99p (Rupees Ninety Seven Lakhs

¶29

Eleven thousand Two hundred and Thirty Seven and Ninety Nine Paise only) due in respect of KVB vehicle Loan (A/c No. 1157749000000412) repayable together with further interest @ 12.25% p.a., with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full, for sale of immovable property morefully detailed in schedule to the OA and for costs of this OA.

¶30

Originally, this Application was filed before DRT-II, Chennai, assigned OA No.292 of 2021, and thereafter in pursuance to the notification from Ministry of Finance, DFS dated 04.10.2022, OA No.292 of 2021 stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.717 of 2023.

¶31

Brief Facts of the case:

¶32

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.

¶33

It is the case of the applicant bank that the first defendant M/s

¶34

Uploaded on 20.04.2026 at 15:40 hours

¶35

T.A. No. 717 of 2023

¶36

¶37

20.04.2026

¶38

SSRM travels represented by its proprietor the second defendant herein approached the applicant bank in the year 2012 and requested for a vehicle loan for a sum of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees forty lakhs only) for the purchase of brand new Ashok Leyland vehicles (2 nos) for commercial purpose. The applicant bank considering the request sanctioned the said sum of Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees forty lakhs only) vide credit sanction intimation dated 06.09.2012. The said loan is repayable in 48 equated monthly instalments of Rs.1,05,335/- each together with an initial holiday period of 3 months together with an interest @ 12.00% p.a. compounded

¶39

with monthly rests or at such rates and rests as may be revised by the bank from time to time. In order to secure the loan, the first defendant executed the following necessary loan documents on 06.09.2012:

¶40

i) Demand promissory note ii) Letter of undertaking to hypothecate vehicle iii) Letter to authority to make payment to the suppliers iv) Letter of undertaking to repay in instalments v) Right to seize letter.

¶41

It is submitted by the applicant bank that the first defendant executed Hypothecation of Motor Vehicle Agreement dated 06.09.2012 hypothecating the said vehicles as a security towards the loan availed.

¶42

The applicant submits that even though the defendants had executed necessary documents towards the loan availed the repayment towards the said loan was highly irregular and despite various demands and reminders made by the applicant bank, the defendants had failed and

¶43

Uploaded on 20.04.2026 at 15:40 hours

¶44

T.A. No. 717 of 2023

¶45

20.04.2026

¶46

¶47

neglected to repay the amount dues. Consequently, the loan account had become Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 10.06.2013 as per the RBI norms.

¶48

The applicant submits that for the loan availed by the first defendant, the second defendant herein had mortgaged his properties at Thirumalairaya Samudhiram Village vide Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 21.05.2014 registered as Doc No.2232/2014 which are morefully described in the schedule to the OA.

¶49

In the meanwhile the applicant had seized and sold the vehicles hypothecated with the bank in an auction for a sum of Rs.14,50,000/and the same was duly credited into the account of the first defendant on 29.02.2016 towards the outstanding dues. Since the account turned NPA with no other option the applicant bank on 04.09.2019 had issued a Demand Notice by initiating SARFAESI proceedings against the property that was given as a security towards the loan account.

¶50

The applicant bank issued Legal Notices dated 12.04.2021 to the defendants demanding the entire outstanding dues. The notice sent to the second defendant was duly acknowledged and the notice sent to the first defendant was retuned. Even after repeated reminders made by the applicant bank, the defendants had failed and neglected to repay the amount dues. Hence, the present Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant bank for recovery of its dues from the defendants.

¶51

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the Defendants 1

¶52

Uploaded on 20.04.2026 at 15:40 hours

¶53

T.A. No. 717 of 2023

¶54

20.04.2026

¶55

¶56

and 2 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, which was returned with remark ”Left” in respect of D-1, while summons to D-2 was duly served. Applicant Bank had caused paper publication of the notice and filed proof thereof. When OA was taken up on 18.05.2022 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, Defendants 1 and 2 were placed ex-parte on 18.05.2022

¶57

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the

¶58

record s.

¶59

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Mr. P.S. Sundaravarathan, 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.

¶60

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.

¶61

The defendants were set ex-parte on 18.05.2022, 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

¶62

Uploaded on 20.04.2026 at 15:40 hours

¶63

T.A. No. 717 of 2023

¶64

20.04.2026

¶65

¶66

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.

¶67

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:

¶68

: O R D E R :

¶69

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶70

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendants a sum of Rs.97,11,237.99p (Rupees Ninety Seven Lakhs Eleven Thousand Two Hundred and Thirty Seven and Ninety

¶71

Nine Paise only) due in respect of KVB vehicle Loan (A/c No.1157749000000412) repayable together with further interest @12.25% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of Application till the date of realization in full along with costs of this application.

¶72

(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 mentioned immovable properties morefully detailed in the OA schedule.

¶73

¶74

Uploaded on 20.04.2026 at 15:40 hours

¶75

T.A. No. 717 of 2023

¶76

20.04.2026

¶77

¶78

(d) 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.

¶79

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

¶80

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

¶81

A copy of this order is 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 20^th day of April, 2026)

¶84

ANNEXURES

¶85

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶86

AW-1: Sh. P.S. Sundaravarathan, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank

¶87

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶88

Sl.	Date	Description of Documents	Exhibit
No.			No.
1.	06.09.2012	Credit sanction intimation	A-1

¶89

Uploaded on 20.04.2026 at 15:40 hours

¶90

T.A. No. 717 of 2023

¶91

¶92

20.04.2026

¶93

2.	06.09.2012	Demandpromissorynote	A-2
3.	06.09.2012	Letter of undertaking to hypothecate vehicle	A-3
4.	06.09.2012	Letter of authority to make payment to the suppliers	A-4
5.	06.09.2012	Letter of undertaking to repay in installments	A-5
6.	06.09.2012	Right to seize letter	A-6
7.	06.09.2012	Hypothecation of motor vehicle agreement	A-7
8.	21.05.2014	Memorandum of deposit of title deeds registered as Doc.No.2232/2014	A-8
9.	13.08.2013	Sale Deed registered as Doc.No.3848/2013	A-9
10.	13.08.2013	Sale Deed registered as Doc.No.3848/2013	A-10
11.	04.09.2019	Demand notice	A-11
12	12.04.2021	Legal notice	A-12
13.		Acknowledgement card & Return covers	A-13
14.		Statement ofaccounts	A-14

¶94

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶95

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶96

:-SCHEDULE-:

¶97

Property of Mr.S.Murugappan

¶98

Item No.1

¶99

All that piece and parcel of the property being divided into Plot No’s 74&75 admeasuring an extent of 2,616 Sq.ft, comprised in survey No’s 10/13,11/3, 21/1 & 12/2 in Thirumalairaya Samudhiram village, Kavinadu Keezhavattam, Pudukkottai district and taluk, Pudukkottai Subregistration district.

¶100

Boundaries for Plot No.74&75

¶101

North by: Muthu’s land

¶102

Uploaded on 20.04.2026 at 15:40 hours

¶103

T.A. No. 717 of 2023

¶104

¶105

20.04.2026

¶106

South by: Road East by: Plot No.76 West by: Plot No.73

¶107

Item No.2:

¶108

All that piece and parcel of the property being divided into Plot No’s 76 & 77 admeasuring an extent of 2,616 Sq.ft, comprised in survey No’s 10/13,11/3, 21/1 & 12/2 in Thirumalairaya Samudhiram village, Kavinadu Keezhavattam, Pudukkottai district and taluk, Pudukkottai Subregistration district.

¶109

Boundaries for Plot No.76 & 77

¶110

North by: Muthu’s land

¶111

South by: Road

¶112

East by: Plot No.78 West by: Plot No.75

¶113

Totally admeasuring an extent of 5,232sq.ft

¶114

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

¶115

Uploaded on 20.04.2026 at 15:40 hours

Karur Vysya Bank v. Murugappan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karur Vysya Bank v. Murugappan

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

Karur Vysya Bank versus M/S Svlp Travels

Punjab and Sind Bank versus M/S J Kaizen Consortium

N Selvam versus Selvam

Anoushka Commodities P Ltd. versus Catholic Syrian Bank Limited

Karur Vysya Bank versus M/S Sri Saha Agencies

Karur Vysya Bank versus M/S Priyaa Engineering