YES BANK vs NEL HOLDINGS LIMITED on 11 August 2026

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –I AT CHENNAI

Dated this 11th Day of August, 2026

PRESENT: SHRI A.S.JAYACHANDRA

Presiding Officer

T. A. 66 of 2022

BETWEEN:

J.C. Flowers Asset Reconstruction Private Limited., Registered office at C G House, 12th Floor, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400 030.

. . . Applicant

AND

1.

M/s. Satchmo Holding Ltd.,

(Formerly known as M/s. NEL Holdings Limited), Registered Office at:

No.110, A Wing, Andrews Building, Level 1, M.G. Road, Bangalore – 560 001.

2.

Sh.Nitesh Shetty,

6A, Nitesh Maytair, 31, Kasturba Road Cross, Near British Library, Bangalore – 560 001.

3.

Vistra (ITCL) India Limited.,

Registered Office at:

IL&FS Financial Centre, Plot No. C22,

G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai, Maharashtra – 400 051.

. . . Defendants.

ORDERS on the Amended Memo of Parties

The defendant no. 1 originally arrayed as M/s. NEL Holdings Limited, is described as M/s. Nithesh Estates Pvt. Ltd., in this memo which is incorrect. The Counsel for the applicant submits that she may be permitted to amend the amended memo of parties by properly describing the original D1 who is now substituted by M/s.

SATCHMO Holdings Limited. Permitted.

Thus, the office objections raised by the registry, stands corrected.

The substitution was allowed by the order dated 05.08.2026 in IA

30/2023.

However, it is seen that the applicant bank had filed a joint memo dated 30.12.2025 which is signed by the applicant and also the defendant no.1.

ORDERS on Joint Memo for Withdrawal

1. The OA is filed by M/s. Yes Bank for recovery of a total sum of Rs.

234,83,64,554/- along with interest filed against the three defendants seeking recovery jointly and severally. Later the present applicant succeeded the original applicant and accordingly

the ARC namely M/s. J.C. Flowers Asset Reconstruction Private Limited is substituted.

2.

The Ld. Counsel for D1 submits that the name of the defendant no.

1 is now rechristened as M/s. SATCHMO Holdings Limited, for which the copy of the digitally signed certificate of incorporation as per Rule 29 of the companies (incorporation) Rules, 2014 dated 16.12.2022 is enclosed. The change of the name is not disputed by the applicant.

3.

The joint memo filed today by the parties dated 30.12.2025 is signed by the ARC and the company with its new name along with the counsel for both the parties.

4.

The Ld. Counsel appearing for the parties submit that consequent to a settlement reached between the applicant and the defendant no.1 company (the substituted defendant) dated 04.08.2025 and 17.12.2025, there has been a comprehensive settlement and the memo shows the letters of settlement having been enclosed. On perusal of the memo such an enclosure at annexure – A is not filed by both the parties though signed by them. However, the Ld.

Counsel for the defendant no.1 today has filed the letter dated 04.08.2025 (photocopy) and the other letter dated 17.12.2025 is not filed. Let the same be filed in the course of the day. The Ld.

Counsel are to take care of such lapses in future.

5.

It is seen from the OA averments that the applicant bank had sought for the recovery certificate against all the defendants jointly

and severally with many interpolations and additions apart from other prayers.

6.

During the course of hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that the matter is settled at Rs. 70 crores fully and finally and the entire agreed amount is paid. It is also submitted in writing in the memo that no amounts are due and the loan account is closed. It is also seen from the memo that the applicants unequivocally wants to withdraw the OA as settled since the full and final discharge of the entire loan outstanding is confirmed in writing.

7.

In view of the memo and having taken note of the submissions, the TA stands disposed of by the following,