Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
STATE BANK OF INDIA vs MURA SILKS on 17 July 2026
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI
Dated this the 17th day of July 2026
Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA
Presiding Officer
M.A. No.161 of 2026 in OA Dy.No.900/2024
State Bank of India,
Tiruvallur branch
Represented by its Branch Manager, Sathya PB No.1, Panagal Park, Tiruvarur- 610 002
...Applicant
-Vs-
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. M/s Mura silks,
Represented by its Proprietor Gurumurthy, S/o Raghupathy, 7BC, VRM road, Vijayapuram,
Tiruvarur- 610 001
2. M.R. Gurumurthy,
S/o Raghupathy,
Door No.21/50, Kumarakoil street,
Tiruvarur- 610 001, Tiruvarur dt
…Defendants
Counsels on record / appeared:
Counsel for Applicant : M/s. S.R. Sumathy ORDER IN MA No.161/2026
1. MA No.161 of 2026 is taken up. This is an application filed by applicant bank for condonation of delay of 185 days in re-presenting the OA.
2. Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank.
3. It is submitted by applicant bank that the present OA was filed for recovery of sum of Rs.2,68,04,606.63/- (Rupees Two Crores Sixty Eight Lakhs Four Thousand Six Hundred and Six and Sixty Three Paise only) together with interest and costs. It is submitted that the OA file has been returned by the Registry on 31.08.2024 for certain corrections. As gathering documents and certain details from the applicant bank took time, OA could not be re-presented within the time granted by this Tribunal, which is neither wilful nor wanton, but only due to aforesaid reasons. Therefore, the applicant bank prayed for condonation of delay of 185 days in re-presenting the OA. Perused the Affidavit filed on behalf of the Applicant bank and the records of the case.
4. As OA is filed for recovery of money due from borrower and in view of the fact that the bank being a financial institution is the custodian of the public money held under trust, the Tribunal relying on the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Madras (At Madurai) in the judgment of V.P. Rajula -Vs.- K.J. Sakadeva Raja reported in LAWS (MAD)- 2020-8-441 feels it apt to condone the delay and give opportunity to applicant to prosecute their case.
5. Accordingly, MA No.161/26 stands allowed and delay is condoned, subject to payment of cost of Rs.2,000/- to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority on or before 10.08.2026 by the applicant and to file the compliance report before the Registry.
6. In case of the applicant complying with the order and filing compliance memo, Registry is directed to number the OA, if otherwise found to be in order. It is clarified that in case if the applicant bank fails to comply with the conditional order above, MA stand dismissed automatically without there being any need to pass separate order.
Sd/-
(S.V. GOWRAMMA)
PRESIDING OFFICER,
DRT-III, CHENNAI (Dictated to Roshnee, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 17th day of July, 2026)