INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK vs Maharaja Trading Company on 16 September 2026

1. M/s Maharaja Trading Company

Rep. by its Proprietor

B.A. Mohammed Sheriff – Since deceased

36A, Kuthampoondi Rooad

Vikravandi – 605 652

2. T.S. Ramalingam

Proprietor, M//s Chakravarthy Trading Co., Vikravandi

…Respondents / Defendants

3. Mrs. Meharban

W/o Late B.A. Mohammed Shariff and only legal heir 6, Adhireddy Lane, Vikkaravandi Villupuram – 605 652

…Proposed Respondent

ORDERS

1. This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the Petitioner / Applicant praying to implead the proposed Respondent as D-1A in the above OA / TA.

Averments in the application

2. The Petitioner / Applicant Bank had filed the above OA No.145 of 2010 in DRT-III Chennai for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,46,10,315/- with further interest. The said OA was ordered on 09.07.2012 and Recovery Certificate was issued on 30.10.2012 in DRC No.177 of 2012. Thereafter the OA stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA Dy No.479 of 2026.

3. It is stated that the 1st defendant B.A. Mohammed Shariff was the borrower and the Proprietor of Maharaja Trading Company, died on 05.08.2023. The present petition is filled to implead wife of 1st defendant who is the only legal heir as per the legal heir certificate issued by the appropriate authority.

4. It is also stated that the Petitioner / Applicant Bank, in the course of recovery action sold one of the mortgaged properties under SARFAESI Act. The auction purchaser having paid the entire sale consideration has been insisting for delivery of original title documents, however, before filing Form-11 for return of original documents, it is necessary to implead the legal heir of the defendant in the above proceeding. Counter filed by the Respondent

5. Pursuant to the default of the borrower firm i.e., 1st defendant herein the petitioner classified the loan account of the firm as NPA on 1.6.2009 and initiated measures under SARFAESI Act by issuing demand notice dated 21.7.2009 and Possession Notice dated 05.11.2009 and also realized a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- by selling one of the secured assets. Subsequently the petitioner initiated OA No.145 of 2010 before DRT-III Chennai for recovery of a sum of Rs.2,50,00,091/- along with interest at the rate of 11.75% per annum. Meanwhile, borrower deposited Rs.50,01,000/- with the bank. Later, the Tribunal allowed the OA with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of application i.e., 19.08.2010 till realization and directed issuance of Recovery Certificate after deducting the amount paid by the defendants herein. Consequently Recovery Certificate under DRC No.177 of 2012 was issued for Rs.2,28,67,958/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

6. Thereafter, the respondent’s husband died on 5.8.2023. While so, the petitioner bank issued sale notice dated 3.5.2024 scheduling dale on 30.05.2024. Challenging the sale the respondent filed SA No.290 of 2024 contending therein that the sale notice has been issued against a dead person. The bank thereafter cancelled the sale and filed a memo to that effect and hence the SA was dismissed as infructuous.

7. Again, the petitioner bank issued another sale notice dated 27.11.2025 fixing the sale on 31.12.2025 and the respondent challenged the same by filing SA No.717 of 2025 on various grounds including limitation. This SA was also dismissed as infructuous as the petitioner bank filed a memo stating therein that the intended sale has been cancelled for administrative reasons.

8. The petitioner bank issued a fresh sale notice dated 07.01.2026 scheduling sale on 11.2.2026. Aggrieved by the same the respondent filed W.P. No.4456 of 2026 before Hon’ble High Court of Madras on 2.2.2026 and the same is pending.

9. The petitioner bank has grossly failed to issue fresh demand notice pursuant to the DRC and the consequent sale held thereon is against the settled legal position. Further, when the writ petition is pending, the petitioner bank has sold the property under SARFAESI Act. Hence the respondent vehemently opposes delivering of original title deeds pertaining to the property sold or releasing of the documents by this Tribunal pending disposal of the writ petition. However, the respondent has no objection for impleading her as one of the parties in the OA and the DRC. It is prayed that the respondent be impleaded as party in the OA and DRC, however not release the original title deeds / documents till disposal of writ petition pending before Hon’ble High Court of Madras.

10. Heard the Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of both the parties. Perused the records.

11. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent has fairly submitted that the Respondent has no objection for being impleaded as a party in the OA and the Recovery Certificate proceedings. The objection raised by the Respondent is principally with regard to the release/delivery of the original title deeds in respect of the property sold by the Applicant Bank, particularly in view of the pendency of W.P. No.4456 of 2026 before the Hon'ble High Court of Madras.

12. The question as to whether the Applicant Bank is entitled to proceed with the recovery measures in the manner adopted by it, including the validity of the sale and the consequential release of the original title documents, are matters which are either the subject matter of the pending proceedings before the Hon'ble High Court or arise independently for consideration at the appropriate stage. The same need not be adjudicated in the present Miscellaneous Application, which is confined to the question of impleadment of the legal heir of the deceased 1st Defendant.

13. In view of the admitted position regarding the death of the 1st Defendant and the status of the proposed Respondent as his legal heir, her presence on record is necessary for the effective and complete adjudication and continuation of the proceedings arising out of the OA and the Recovery Certificate. No prejudice would be caused to the Respondent by such impleadment, particularly when she herself has stated that she has no objection to being impleaded.

14. Accordingly, the following:-

ORDER

(a) MA No.39 of 2026 is allowed.

(b) The proposed Respondent is ordered to be impleaded as D-1A, being the legal heir of deceased 1st Defendant B.A. Mohammed Shariff, in the above TA/Recovery Certificate proceedings.

(c) The Applicant Bank is directed to carry out the necessary amendments and file amended OA. Upon filing of amended OA, Registry is directed to issue amended DRC.

Sd/- (SHARANG DHAR UPADHYAY) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II CHENNAI (Dictated to PS, who typed in the system directly, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this 16th day of September, 2026)