CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LIMITED vs M/s SRIVARI TRADING COMPANY (P) LTD on 17 August 2026

1. M/s.Srivari Trading Company (P) Ltd.,

V/272A, Kolanguttukara,

Choolissery Post,

Thrissur – 680 541.

2. P.K.Balasubramanian,

S/o.late P.N.Krishna Iyyer,

Door No.XXXII/215,

Narayana Vihar, Punkunnam, Thrissur – 680 002. Residing at C-11-Srivari Brindavan, Peelumedu, Coimbatore – 641 016. Managing Director, M/s.Srivari Trading Company (Pvt.) Ltd., P.O.Choolissery - 680 541, Thrissur District.

3. Shobhana Balasubramanian,

W/o.P.K.Balasubramanian,

Door No.XXXII/215,

Narayana Vihar, Punkunnam, Thrissur – 680 002. Residing at C-11-Srivari Brindavan, Peelumedu, Coimbatore – 641 016.

Director, M/s.Srivari Trading- Company (Pvt.) Ltd., Kolanguttukara, P.O.Choolissery - 680 541, Thrissur District.

4. Bharath Balasubramanian,

S/o.P.K.Balasubramanian,

Door No.XXXII/215,

Narayana Vihar, Punkunnam, Thrissur – 680 002. Director, M/s.Srivari Trading- Company (Pvt.) Ltd., P.O.Choolissery - 680 541, Thrissur District.

5. C.A.Parvathy Ammal (Dead),

W/o.late P.N.Krishna Iyer,

VI/474, Parvathy Mandir,

Elite Gardenia,

Puzhakkal P.O. – 680 553.

6. M/s.Ekadantha Petro Products (P) Ltd.,

XIV/300, Velakode, Mundur P.O.,

Thrissur – 680 541.

…Defendants

7. P.K.Ananthanarayanan,

S/o.late P.N.Krishna Iyer,

Narayana Vihar,

Valiyapadom Road,

Edappally P.O.,

Kochi – 682 025.

8. P.K.Sivaramakrishnan,

S/o.late P.N.Krishna Iyer,

Narayana Vihar,

Valiyapadom Road,

Edappally P.O.,

Kochi – 682 025.

9. P.K.Narayanaswamy,

S/o.late P.N.Krishna Iyer,

P.S.N.Villa, Green Garden,

Karshaka Road,

Kaloor, Kochi – 682 017.

10. P.K.Ramanathan,

S/o.late P.N.Krishna Iyer,

No.9A, Skyline Topaz,

Kaloor – Kadavanthra Road,

Kochi – 682 017.

11. P.K.Sangameswaran,

S/o.late P.N.Krishna Iyer,

Parvathy Mandir,

Elite Gardenia,

Puzhakkal P.O.,

Thrissur – 680 553.

12. Girija,

W/o.T.S.Ananatharaman,

Parvathy Mandir,

Elite Gardenia,

Puzhakkal P.O.,

Thrissur – 680 553.

13. Usha,

Parvathy Mandir,

Elite Gardenia,

Puzhakkal P.O.,

Thrissur – 680 553.

…Additional defendants [Additional defendants 7 to 13 were impleaded as legal heirs of deceased 5th defendant as per order in IA No.369/2014]

This Original Application having been heard on 03.08.2026 in the presence of Advocate Sri.C.A.Joy for the applicant bank and Senior Advocate Sri.George Thomas Mevada for additional defendants 7 to 13 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.11,17,29,189.46 due under cash credit account together with future interest thereon @15.50% per annum with monthly rests and penal interest @1% per annum from the defendants jointly and severally and their assets. Facts of the case:

2. The applicant is a banking company incorporated under the Companies Act, having its registered office at Thrissur and branches among various places including one at R.S.Road, Thrissur.

3. The 1st defendant is a private limited company, 2nd defendant is the managing director and defendants 3 and 4 are its directors. The defendants approached the bank for taking over of cash credit facility existed with Axis Bank with further request to enhance the cash credit limit. Considering their request, cash credit limit of Rs.1550 lakhs and a term loan of Rs.159.80 lakhs (term loan was closed subsequently by sale of the secured asset) were granted as per sanction letter dated 25.01.2010. The cash credit limit was availed by the defendants after creating charge over movable assets and equitable mortgage was created over immovable properties and also executed demand promissory note and hypothecation agreement in favour of the bank. In consideration of providing the cash credit facility, defendants 2 to 6 executed guarantee agreement dated 25.01.2010. After availing the loan, the defendants did not adhere to the repayment schedule and the account turned NPA on 30.09.2010. Consequently, the bank initiated recovery proceeding and conducted auction sale of the immovable properties and an amount of Rs.5,71,90,020.30 was given credit to the loan account of the 1st defendant company. Accordingly, an amount of Rs.10,96,71,675.46 is the outstanding amount in the cash credit account as on 31.08.2012. The applicant issued a lawyer notice to the defendants on 24.09.2012 calling upon them to repay the outstanding dues. But they did not settle the liability and hence the applicant was constrained to file the OA claiming the following reliefs:

(i) To recover a sum of Rs.11,17,29,189.46 due under the cash credit account as on 15.10.2012 together with pendente lite and post decree interest thereon from the defendants jointly and severally and their assets;

(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. Defendants 1 to 3 filed written statement denying the averments in the OA. It is contended inter alia that applicant bank approached the defendants with an offer to take over the existing credit facilities from Axis Bank, Bank of Baroda and Federal Bank Ltd. Whereupon, defendants 1 and 6 had shifted all their operations to the applicant bank. Due to poor availability of raw materials, rise in dollar value etc., business of the defendants had suffered a temporary setback. During this period, the 1st defendant submitted a loan restructuring proposal offering additional security which was not considered by the bank. Meanwhile, the Authorised Officer of the bank initiated recovery proceeding under the SARFAESI Act and sold the secured assets much below the valuation taken by the bank in December, 2009. Aggrieved by the clandestine sale of the property, these defendants filed SA No.894/2012 before the Tribunal. The rate of interest claimed in the OA is against the agreed terms and conditions of the loan agreement. In view of the above, defendants 1 to 3 prayed to dismiss the OA with costs.

5. Defendants 4 to 6 entered appearance in this case but they have not filed written statement despite time granted.

6. Additional 7th defendant filed written statement denying the averments in the OA. It is claimed that the 1st defendant company had availed a cash credit limit of Rs.15.50 crores as per sanction letter dated 25.01.2010 from Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. and equitable mortgage was to be created over the immovable properties to secure the loan including 73.50 cents of land owned by the deceased 5th defendant and her husband Sri.P.N.Krishna Iyer. The 2nd defendant had signed the arrangement letter dated 25.01.2010 and the guarantee agreement on behalf of the 5th defendant in his capacity as power holder of the 5th defendant. The 5th defendant had created equitable mortgage over 73.5 cents of land in favour of the bank and this was the only property owned by her. Within a short time, the activity of the 1st defendant appears to have failed and the loan account became NPA by 30.09.2010. The applicant initiated proceeding under the SARFAESI Act for recovering the debt.

Meanwhile, the 5th defendant conveyed the property of an extent of 73.5 cents in favour of M/s.Kalyan Jewellers India (Pvt.) Ltd. as per document No.3747/2011 dated 24.08.2011 for Rs.10.60 crores and the entire sale proceeds were credited to the loan account of the 1st defendant towards discharge of the outstanding liability. While passing away on 23.07.2013, the 5th defendant did not have any other immovable property and as such, no movable or immovable assets devolved on additional defendants 7 to 13 after her death. It is also submitted that they, being the legal heirs of late 5th defendant, did not inherit any property or assets from their mother and liability, if any, of the legal heirs can be limited to the extent of assets inherited by them from the deceased. Hence the claim amount cannot be recovered from the additional defendants or their assets and the OA may be dismissed as against them.

7. Additional defendants 8 to 13 filed reply statement claiming that they adopt the reply statement filed by the additional 7th defendant as that of these defendants. Proof Affidavit:

8. In order to establish the claim on behalf of the applicant bank, one Mr.P.K.Varghese, Area Manager has filed proof affidavit and produced the loan documents marked as Exhibits A1 to A19. The proof affidavit filed by AW1 and the documents produced in this case are not challenged by the defendants. The availing of the cash credit facility is well established from the documents placed by the applicant bank.

9. Heard arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant bank and learned Senior Counsel appearing for additional defendants 7 to 13.

10. The sole issue arises for consideration is whether the applicant is entitled to recover the amount as claimed in this case?

11. On careful consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and on perusal of the pleadings and evidence available on record, it appears that there is no dispute with regard to the availing of the cash credit limit of Rs.15.50 crores from Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. and creation of mortgage over the immovable properties. It is also the admitted case that due to non-repayment of the amount in terms of the loan agreement, the account became NPA on 30.09.2010 and the bank initiated recovery proceeding under the provision of the SARFAESI Act and the secured assets were sold for realization

of the outstanding dues. The contention of defendants 1 to 3 about the illegality in the sale proceeding conducted by the Authorised Officer of the bank cannot be adjudicated in this proceeding. The defendants 1 to 3 and 6 had filed SA No.894/2012 (TSA No.418/2016) challenging the sale of the secured assets which was dismissed by the Tribunal as per final order dated 03.04.2017.

12. The additional defendants 7 to 13 did not dispute the execution of guarantee agreement by the deceased 5th defendant to secure the subject loan availed by the 1st defendant company. It is claimed by them that the only item of property owned by their predecessor, 5th defendant in this case, was already sold on 24.08.2011 for Rs.10.60 crores and the entire sale proceeds were appropriated towards the subject loan account. The factum of appropriation of the sale proceeds in respect of the mortgaged property by the deceased 5th defendant is not disputed by the applicant bank. It is the definite case of additional defendants 7 to 13 that while the 5th defendant passed away on 23.07.2013, she did not have any other immovable property and as such no immovable property devolved on them after her death.

13. The evidence adduced by the applicant bank would prove their claim made in this case. As on 15.10.2012, a sum of Rs.11,17,29,189.46 is outstanding in the cash credit account, which is clearly established from the account statement marked as Ext.A7. In the above backdrop, applicant bank is entitled to recover the said amount from defendants 1 to 4 and 6 and their assets. In absence of proof of inheritance of any other assets by the additional defendants 7 to 13 from the deceased 5th defendant, they cannot be held liable for any outstanding in the loan account of the defendants.

14. Considering the amount advanced, interest applied, repayments effected, default committed and the recovery effected by sale of the secured assets, I am of the view that the applicant bank is entitled to get pendente lite and post decree interest @14% per annum, which is reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case.

15. 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.11,17,29,189.46 (Rupees eleven crores seventeen lakhs twenty nine thousand one hundred and eighty nine and Paise forty six only) due under the cash credit account from defendants 1 to 4 and 6 and their assets;

(ii) Pendente lite and post decree interest @14% per annum on the sum of Rs.11,17,29,189.46 (Rupees eleven crores seventeen lakhs twenty nine thousand one hundred and eighty nine and Paise forty six only) from 18.10.2012 till realization from defendants 1 to 4 and 6 and their assets; and

(iii) also costs and expenses borne by it for realization of the loan from defendants 1 to 4 and 6.

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

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

18. 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 17th day of August, 2026)

[SOVAN KUMAR DASH] PRESIDING OFFICER

A P P E N D I X Witness for Applicant: AW1: Sri.P.K.Varghese, Area Manager of the applicant bank. Witness for Defendant(s): Nil

Applicant’s Exhibits

Ext.No Date Particulars of documents

A1 21.07.2006 Copy of power of attorney executed by the bank in favour of AW1. A2 05.02.1997 Copy of power of attorney executed by the bank in favour of the then Senior Manager. A3 25.01.2010 Sanction letter issued by the applicant bank sanctioning cash credit limit of Rs.1550 lakhs to the 1st defendant. A4 25.01.2010 Demand promissory note for Rs.15.50 crores executed by defendants 1 to 4. A5 25.01.2010 Agreement of hypothecation executed by the defendants. A6

25.01.2010 Guarantee agreement executed by defendants 2 to 6. A7

20.09.2012 Certified copy of the statement of account relating to the cash credit facility. A8 20.09.2012 Statement showing the rate of interest applied in the cash credit account from time to time. A9

24.09.2012 Copy of lawyer notice issued to the defendants. A10 … Returned notice sent to the 1st defendant. A11 … Returned notice sent to the 2nd defendant. A12 27.09.2012 Acknowledgement card signed by the 2nd defendant. A13 … Returned notice sent to the 3rd defendant. A14 27.09.2012 Acknowledgement card signed by the 3rd defendant. A15 … Returned notice sent to the 4th defendant in his official address.

Defendants’ Exhibits – Nil

PRESIDING OFFICER

A16 … Returned notice sent to the 4th defendant in his residential address. A17 … Returned notice addressed to the 5th defendant as ‘unclaimed’. A18 … Returned notice sent to the 6th defendant. A19 03.04.2017 Copy of order in SA No.894/2012 of the Tribunal.

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-2, KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT: SRI.SOVAN KUMAR DASH PRESIDING OFFICER

Dated the 17th August, 2026

TA No.512/2016 (OA NO.441/2012)

Between

CSB Bank Ltd., Formerly Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd., R.S.Road Branch, Thrissur.

…Applicant And

M/s.Srivari Trading Company (P) Ltd., V/272A, Kolanguttukara, Choolissery Post, Thrissur – 680 541 & 12 others.

...Defendants &

additional defendants

F I N A L O R D E R