HDFC BANK vs M/s J V Enterprises on 12 February 2026

1. M/s.J.V.Enterprises,

V/574, CI, Ammus,

Chelakkarakulanthingal House,

Madayikonam, Irinjalakkuda,

Thrissur – 680 712,

Partnership firm, represented by its

Partner Saritha C.P.,

W/o.late C.K.Guruvayurappan.

2. Saritha C.P.,

Partner, M/s.J.V.Enterprises,

V/574, CI, Ammus,

Chelakkarakulanthingal House,

Madayikonam, Irinjalakkuda,

Thrissur – 680 712.

3. Vismaya,

Aged 6 years,

D/o.late C.K.Guruvayurappan,

V/574, CI, Ammus,

Chelakkarakulanthingal House,

Madayikonam, Irinjalakkuda,

Thrissur – 680 712.

Represented by her mother and natural guardian Saritha C.P.,

W/o.late C.K.Guruvayurappan,

V/574, CI, Ammus,

Chelakkarakulanthingal House,

Madayikonam, Irinjalakkuda,

Thrissur – 680 712.

4. Parvathy Ammal,

Mother of late C.K.Guruvayurappan,

V/574, CI, Ammus,

Chelakkarakulanthingal House,

Madayikonam, Irinjalakkuda,

Thrissur – 680 712.

…Defendants This Original Application having been heard on 30.01.2026 in the presence of Advocate Sri.M.Sunil for the applicant bank and Advocate Ms.Bini Das, court guardian for minor 3rd defendant and stood over to this day for consideration, the Tribunal delivered the following: F I N A L O R D E R

This Original Application has been filed under S.19(1) of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 for recovery of a sum of Rs.14,37,662.21 due under overdraft account together with future interest on the sum of Rs.13,28,752.78 @18% per annum with monthly rests from defendants 1 and 2 jointly and severally and by sale of the schedule property and defendants 3 and 4 shall be liable to the extent of assets inherited by them from late C.K.Guruvayurappan.

Facts of the case:

2. The 1st defendant is a partnership firm of which one C.K.Guruvayurappan and the 2nd defendant were the partners. During 2013, the 1st defendant, through its managing partner C.K.Guruvayurappan, approached the applicant bank seeking an overdraft facility of Rs.10 lakhs, which was sanctioned as per sanction communication letter dated 15.04.2013. As security for the loan, the 1st defendant through C.K.Guruvayurappan executed demand promissory note, letter of continuity, master facility agreement and letter of undertaking in favour of the applicant bank on 16.04.2013. The 2nd defendant and C.K.Guruvayurappan stood as guarantors for the loan. Towards collateral security for the overdraft facility, C.K.Guruvayurappan and the 2nd defendant created equitable mortgage over the schedule property and executed memorandum dated 16.04.2013 confirming the deposit of title deeds with the applicant bank on 15.04.2013.

3. Due to default in repayment, the account turned NPA. Thereafter, the applicant issued demand notice under S.13(2) of the SARFAESI Act to C.K.Guruvayurappan as well as defendants 1 and 2 calling upon them to repay the outstanding dues. Though the defendants 1 and 2 were served with the notice, they did not liquidate the liability. Meanwhile, C.K.Guruvayurappan died and defendants 2 to 4 are his legal heirs. As there was no positive response from the side of defendants 1 and 2 to repay the dues, the applicant was constrained to file the OA claiming the following reliefs:

(i) To recover the sum of Rs.14,37,662.21 together with pendente lite and post-decree interest on the sum of Rs.13,28,752.78 from defendants 1 and 2 jointly and severally and by sale of the schedule property and the defendants 3 and 4 shall be liable to the extent of assets inherited by them from late C.K.Guruvayurappan;

(ii) To recover the costs, charges and expenses from the defendants;

(iii) To issue Recovery Certificate to the Recovery Officer with a direction to recover the amount and pay it to the applicant bank. Written statement

4. The court guardian of minor 3rd defendant filed written statement denying the averments in the OA. It is contended that the OA is not maintainable against this defendant. The applicant is not entitled to claim exorbitant rate of interest as claimed in the OA and it has illegally charged an amount of Rs.1,08,909.43 as penal interest in the account. Hence the applicant is not entitled to recover the amount claimed in this case.

5. The defendants 1, 2 and 4 were duly served with summons. But they remained absent from the proceeding and hence they were declared exparte on 19.09.2016. Proof Affidavit:

6. In order to establish the claim on behalf of the applicant bank, one Mr.Mani Veettil, Senior Manager has filed proof affidavit and produced the loan documents marked as Exhibits A1 to A15. The availing of loan and creation of mortgage over the schedule property are well established from the documents placed by the applicant bank.

7. Heard arguments and perused the records of the case.

8. The sole issue arises for consideration is whether the applicant is entitled to get the relief as claimed in this case?

9. On perusal of the materials, it appears that the 1st defendant partnership firm through its managing partner late C.K.Guruvayurappan availed overdraft facility of Rs.10 lakhs from the applicant bank as per Ext.A1 sanction letter dated 15.04.2013

and executed the security documents marked as Exts.A2, A3, A4, A6 in favour of the applicant bank. The 2nd defendant and late C.K.Guruvayurappan executed Ext.A5 guarantee agreement dated 16.04.2013 guaranteeing due repayment of the outstanding loan amount, besides creating mortgage over the schedule property by deposing Ext.A7 sale deed No.2457/2011 with the applicant bank and executed Ext.A8 memorandum confirming the deposit of title deed with the applicant bank. The interest charged in the loan account is as per the terms of sanction. The account statements marked as Exts.A13 and A14 would show that an amount of Rs.14,37,662.21 is outstanding in the overdraft account as on 14.04.2016 which the applicant is entitled to recover from defendants 1 and 2 and by sale of the schedule property and in case of any shortfall, the applicant can proceed against the assets, if any, inherited by defendants 2 to 4 from late C.K.Guruvayurappan. The issue is answered in favour of the applicant bank.

10. Considering the amount advanced, interest and penal interest applied and repayments effected, I am of the view that the applicant bank is entitled to get pendente lite and post decree interest @12% per annum on the sum of Rs.13,28,752.78 (i.e., after excluding the penal interest of Rs.1,08,909.43 from the OA

claim amount of Rs.14,37,662.21), which is reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case.

11. The applicant bank, therefore, is entitled to get a final order on the following lines: In the result, the applicant bank is given a final order allowing it to recover:

(i) the sum of Rs.14,37,662.21 (Rupees fourteen lakhs thirty seven thousand six hundred and sixty two and Paise twenty one only) due under the overdraft account from defendants 1 and 2 jointly and severally and by sale of the schedule property; in case of any shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the assets, if any, inherited by defendants 2 to 4 from late C.K.Guruvayurappan;

(ii) pendente lite and post-decree interest @12% per annum on the sum of Rs.13,28,752.78 (Rupees thirteen lakhs twenty eight thousand seven hundred and fifty two and Paise seventy eight only) from 15.04.2016 till realization from defendants 1 and 2 jointly and severally and by sale of the schedule property; in case of any shortfall, the same shall be recovered from the assets, if any, inherited by defendants 2 to 4 from late C.K.Guruvayurappan; and

(iii) costs and expenses borne by it for realization of the loan from defendants 1 and 2.

12. The schedule to the OA shall be appended to this final order.

13. The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the date of this final order.

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

15. Communicate copy of this order to both parties as provided in R.16 r/w R.2(c) of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993. (Dictated to my PA, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Tribunal on this the 12th day of February, 2026)

[SOVAN KUMAR DASH] PRESIDING OFFICER

A P P E N D I X Witness for Applicant: AW1: Sri.Mani Veettil, Senior Manager of the applicant bank.

Witness for Defendant(s): Nil

Applicant’s Exhibits

Ext.No Date Particulars of documents

A1 15.04.2013 Sanction letter issued by the applicant bank sanctioning overdraft limit of Rs.10 lakhs to the 1st defendant. A2 16.04.2013 Demand promissory note for Rs.10 lakhs executed by the 1st defendant through late C.K.Guruvayurappan. A3 16.04.2013 Letter of continuity executed by the 1st defendant through late C.K.Guruvayurappan. A4 16.04.2013 Master facility agreement executed by the 1st defendant through late C.K.Guruvayurappan. A5 16.04.2013 Letter of guarantee executed by the 2nd defendant and late C.K.Guruvayurappan. A6 16.04.2013 Undertaking cum indemnity executed by the 1st defendant through late C.K.Guruvayurappan. A7 10.10.2011 Sale deed No.2457/2011 of Irinjalakkuda SRO. A8 16.04.2013 Memorandum of deposit of title deeds executed by late C.K.Guruvayurappan and the 2nd defendant. A9 16.04.2013 Declaration cum indemnity executed by late C.K.Guruvayurappan and the 2nd defendant. A10 28.08.2014 Copy of recall notice issued to defendants 1 and 2 and late C.K.Guruvayurappan. A11 02.02.2015 Copy of demand notice under S.13(2) of the SARFAESI Act issued to defendants 1 and 2 and late C.K.Guruvayurappan. A12 … Reply sent to the applicant bank by the 2nd defendant seeking four months’ time to close the loan account.

A13 … certified copy of the statement of account relating to the overdraft facility. A14 … Statement showing the unapplied interest and penal interest under Ext.A13 account. A15 … Certificate showing the rate of interest applied in Ext.A13 account from time to time.

Defendants’ Exhibits – Nil

PRESIDING OFFICER

PRESIDING OFFICER

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT: SRI.SOVAN KUMAR DASH PRESIDING OFFICER

Dated the 12th February, 2026

TA No.1163/2016 (OA NO.346/2016)

Between

HDFC Bank Ltd., Department of Special Operations, 1st Floor, Choice Towers, Manorama Junction, Kochi – 682 016. …Applicant

And

M/s.J.V.Enterprises, V/574, CI, Ammus, Chelakkarakulanthingal House, Madayikonam, Irinjalakkuda, Thrissur – 680 712, Partnership firm, represented by its Partner Saritha C.P., W/o.late C.K.Guruvayurappan & 3 others.

…Defendants

F I N A L O R D E R