YES BANK vs NHDPL Properties PVT LTD on 24 September 2026

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –I AT CHENNAI

Dated this 24thDay of September, 2026

PRESENT: SHRI A.S.JAYACHANDRA

Presiding Officer

TA 158 of 2022

(Old OA No. 6/2020)

BETWEEN:

JC Flowers Asset Reconstruction Private Limited., (Substituted in place of Yes Bank Ltd. Vide order dated 31.08.2026 in IA No. 32 of 2023), Registered Office at:

C.G. House, 12th Floor, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400 030.

……Applicant

AND

1. Northroof Ventures Private Limited.,

(Formerly known as NHDPL Properties Pvt. Ltd.), (substituted in place of NHDPL Properties Pvt. Ltd., vide order dated 21.09.2026 in IA No. 104 of 2026), No. 1/B, 1st Floor,# 41, Castle Street, Opp Sacred Heart Church,Richmond Road, Ashok Nagar, Richmond Town,Bengaluru – 560 025.

2. NEL Holdings Limited

(presently known as Satchmo Holdings Limited)., Nitesh TimeSquare, 7th Floor, No. 8, M.G. Road, Bengaluru, Karnataka – 560 001.

3. Nitesh Shetty,

6 A, Nitesh Mayfair,

31, Kasturba Road Cross,

Near British Library,

Bangalore – 560 001.

4. Vistra (ITCL) India Limited.,

IL & FS Financial Centre,

PlotNo. C22 G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051.

Having its corporate Office at :

A1, Latheef, 1st Floor, No. 2, Union Street, Off Infantry Road, Bengaluru – 560 001.

…..Defendants.

Proceedings Dated: 24.09.2026

Applicant by Ms. Meera, Adv. (Enrollment No. MS 1832/2013)

D1 & D2 by Ms. Madhumitha, Adv.(Enrollment No. MS 6194/2022)

Impleading Petitioner by Shri. K. A. Ramakrishnan, Adv a/w. Shri. Nirmal Kumar, Adv.

None for other defendants.

IA 145/2020 – filed under Section 19(25) of the RDB Act, 1993 by a third party seeking the impleadment as a necessary party.

The IA was filed before DRT – II, Bangalore. The Ld. Counsel for the intervener submits that as there were several litigations including a writ petition filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka and the same was kept pending.

However, today it is submitted that the said IA is not pressed in view of the settlement reached between the parties. Considering the same the present IA stands disposed as not pressed.

ORDERS ON THE JOINT MEMO OF COMPROMISE DATED 30.12.2025

1. The joint compromise memo is filed by the applicant and the defendant no.1 seeking disposal of the matter since settled outside the Tribunal.

2. The

OA

was

filed

by

Yes

Bank

for

recovery

of

Rs.393,84,39,943.01p against four defendants.

3. The original applicant Yes Bank had assigned the debt claimed in favour of M/s. JC Flowers Asset Reconstruction Company Private Limited. The substitution of this ARC is allowed vide order dated 31.08.2026.

4. It is also coming through the record that the original defendant no. 1 company is now rechristened for which the necessary documents issued by the ROC was produced, which is noted by this Tribunal and the substitution of the new name is permitted vide orders dated 21.09.2026.

5. Today a joint memo is filed duly signed by the applicant and the defendant no. 1 company.

6. Heard the Ld. Counsel. It is found from the averments and the arguments advanced that the applicant and defendant no. 1

company had entered into a settlement dated 17.12.2025.

Though the same is referred as annexure - A to the memo.

7. According

to

the

parties

the

settlement

amount

is

Rs.3,78,00,000/. Both the parties submit that as per the terms of settlement reached outside the Tribunal between the applicant and defendant no. 1, the entire agreed amount is paid fully and finally towards the entire loan outstanding amounts

and the loan account is closed. In view of the above, the both the parties pray that the same be taken on record and matter be disposed since the settlement is towards full and final discharge of entire loan outstanding.

8. The applicant having reported the complete full and final payment towards the loan account, though the defendants 2 to 4 are not parties to the settlement, the Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that her client is not pressing the reliefs against defendants 2 to 4 also.

9. In view of the above settlement reported, there remains nothing to be considered or surviving for adjudication. Hence the following,