BANK OF INDIA vs M/S B IMAGE UNISEX SALON PROP MS.R.RAMYA on 31 August 2026

: - FINAL ORDER - :

1. This Original Application is filed on 20.07.2021 by the applicant bank under Section 19 (1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993) against the defendants jointly and severally, for recovery of a total sum of Rs.24,02,989.44p (Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs Two Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Nine and Forty Four paise Only) as follows:

(i) A sum of Rs.10,08,158.80p due in respect of Over Draft Loan (A/c No.801425110000043), repayable together with further interest @9.15% p.a. with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% p.a. from the date of filing the OA till date of realization in full;

(ii) A sum of Rs.13,94,830.64p due in respect Term Loan (A/c No.804073410000004), repayable together with further interest @11.85% p.a. with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% p.a. from the date of filing the OA till date of realization in full along with costs of this application.

2. Originally, this Application was filed before DRT-II, Chennai, assigned OA No.65 of 2022, and thereafter in pursuance to the notification from Ministry of Finance, DFS dated 04.10.2022, OA No.65 of 2022 stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.464 of 2023. Brief Facts of the case:

3. The Applicant submits that the application is filed within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 24 of the Recovery of Debts and

Bankruptcy Act, 1993, and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal.

4. It is the case of the Applicant Bank that the 1st Defendant is a Proprietary concern, wherein 2nd Defendant is its Proprietrix. The applicant bank submits that the 1st Defendant had applied for Overdraft facility of Rs.5 Lakh to the Applicant Bank, Kodambakkam Branch. After due consideration of the above request and proposal of the 2nd Defendant, the Applicant Bank had sanctioned Overdraft facility of Rs.5 Lakh vide its Sanction Letter.

5. The applicant submits that in order to secure the loan, the 1st Defendant had executed the following Documents on 19.09.2016 in favour of the Applicant Bank:

a. Demand Promissory Note for Rs.5 Lakh

b. Authorization Letter C. Omnibus Undertaking

6. It is submitted by the applicant bank that the Defendant requested for enhanced Overdraft facility. After due consideration of the above request of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank enhanced Overdraft facility from Rs.5 Lakh to Rs.7 Lakh vide its Sanction Letter dated 16.12.2017.

7. The applicant bank submits that the 2nd Defendant as Proprietrix of 1st Defendant had executed the following Documents on 16.12.2017 in favour of the Applicant Bank:

a. Demand Promissory Note for Rs.2 Lakh

b. Authorization Letter c. Omnibus Undertaking

d. Supplemental deed of hypothecation.

8. The applicant bank further submits that the 2nd Defendant as Proprietrix of 1st Defendant had executed the Acknowledgement of Debt on 16.12.2017 confirming the Balance of Rs.4,99,151.22p as of 15.12.2017. It is submitted that the 2nd Defendant as Proprietrix of 1st Defendant had executed the Acknowledgement of Debts on 03.12.2020 confirming the Balance of Rs.8,10,099.24p as of 02.12.2020.

9. It is submitted by the applicant bank that the 2nd Defendant as Proprietrix of 1st Defendant had applied for Term loan facility to the Applicant Bank's Arumbakkam Branch. After due consideration of the above request of the Defendant, the Applicant Bank had sanctioned Term Loan facility of Rs.15 Lakh vide its Sanction Letter dated 21.03.2016.

10. The applicant bank submits that the 2nd Defendant as Proprietrix of 1st Defendant had executed the following Documents on 21.03.2016 in favour of the Applicant Bank:

a. Demand Promissory Note for Rs.15 Lakh

b. Authorization Letter

c. Installment letter

d. Omnibus Undertaking

e. Hypothecation cum loan agreement

11. It is submitted by the applicant bank that the 2nd Defendant as Proprietrix of 1st Defendant had executed the Acknowledgement of Debts on 19.03.2019, confirming the Balance of Rs.10,48,198.32p as of

18.03.2019.

12. It is further submitted that the Applicant Bank disbursed the Sanctioned Loan Amounts as per the sanction letter & loan agreements/documents. The Defendants failed and neglected to repay to the Applicant Bank, the loan amount, interests and other monies and also committed other defaults in observing the conditions of the Loan Agreements and Sanction Letter. Consequent to the defaults committed by the Borrower in respect of the repayments, the account was classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 31.01.2019 for OD limit and Term Loan in accordance with the directions/guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India.

13. The applicant bank submits that in view of the defaults committed by the Defendants, the Applicant Bank vide their Recall Notice dated 25.04.2019 demanded and called on the Defendants to discharge their entire liabilities by paying to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.19,02,827.66p, plus further interest within 7 days from the receipt of the said Notice.

14. The applicant bank submits that in spite of the Applicant's notice, the Defendants did not make the entire payment as per the Demand Notice. Consequent to the sanction of the said Mortgage Loan Facility by the applicant to the 1st defendant, appropriate accounts were opened in the name of the 1st defendant in the usual books of accounts of the applicant bank at is Kodambakkam & Arumbakkkam Branches, Chennai.

15. The applicant bank has regularly kept and maintained the accounts and all entries of debits and credits were correctly made therein by the applicant bank in the regular, ordinary and usual course of its banking business in as much as all the payments by way of advance allowed to the defendants and interest accruing thereon at the contracted rate with agreed rests as also all agreed incidental costs, charges and expenses etc., were duly debited and the payments made by the defendants towards part liquidation of their liabilities were correctly credited to the aforesaid accounts on respective dates. Despite repeated requests and demands, as defendants did not come forward to repay the dues, the present Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant bank for recovery of its dues from the defendants.

16. After the filing of the OA, summons were sent to the Defendants 1 and 2 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, summons to the D1 and D2 returned with postal endorsement ‘Left’. Applicant bank had caused paper publication of the notice and filed proof thereof. When OA was taken up on 22.09.2022 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, defendants 1 and 2 were placed ex-parte on 22.09.2022.

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

17. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Mr. I. Thaveethuvel, Constituted Attorney of the Applicant Bank, has filed his Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW-1 and list of documents came to be marked as Ex A-1 to A-19.

18. A careful examination of the pleadings in the Proof Affidavit and documents Exhibits A-1 to A-19 evidence that the borrowal of credit facilities and execution of loan and security documents are true, in terms of averments made in Original Application as well as Proof Affidavit filed by applicant bank establishing its claim. Applicant bank filed Statement of Accounts duly certified under Bankers’ Book Evidence Act, evidencing the amount claimed against defendants.

19. The defendants were set ex-parte on 22.09.2022, but till this day they did not take any action to set aside the ex-parte order and did not choose to contest the claim. Further, a careful scrutiny of records makes it clear that present application is filed well within limitation and this Tribunal possesses necessary and proper jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the claim. No oral or documentary evidence on the side of defendants are produced or filed to dispute the claim of applicant bank. Hence, it can be concluded that applicant bank has proved its claim against defendants.

20. With regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied, the conduct and operations in the account and the default committed, this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled for a final order on the following terms:

: O R D E R :

21. The OA is allowed with costs,

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendants, jointly and severally, a total sum of Rs.24,02,989.44p (Rupees

Twenty Four Lakhs Two Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Nine and Forty Four paise Only) as follows:

(i) A sum of Rs.10,08,158.80p due in respect of Over Draft Loan (A/c No.801425110000043), repayable together with further interest @9.15% p.a. with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% p.a. from the date of filing the OA till date of realization in full;

(ii) A sum of Rs.13,94,830.64p due in respect Term Loan (A/c No.804073410000004), repayable together with further interest @11.85% p.a. with monthly rests and penal interest @ 2% p.a. from the date of filing the OA till date of realization in full along with costs of this application.

(b) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the defendants duly considering the amounts, if any, paid by the defendants and/or amount realized by sale of assets etc., during the intervening period after the filing of the OA, enabling the Registry to prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by defendants to the applicant bank.

(c) The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the date of receipt of this final order.

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

22. A copy of this order be communicated to the parties concerned.

Sd/- (S.V. GOWRAMMA)

PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

(Dictated to Steno (Suriya), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 31st day of August, 2026) ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

AW-1: Mr. I. Thaveethuvel, Constituted Attorney of the Applicant Bank. Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

Sl. No. Description of Documents Exhibit No.

1. Demand Promissory Note Rs.5 Lakh dated 19.09.2016. A-1

2. Letter of Authorization dated 19.09.2016. A-2

3. Omnibus Undertaking dated 19.09.2016. A-3

4. Sanction Letter dated 16.12.2017. A-4

5. Demand Promissory Note Rs.2 Lakh dated 16.12.2017. A-5

6. Letter of Authorization dated 16.12.2017. A-6

7. Omnibus Undertaking dated 16.12.2017. A-7

8. Supplemental deed of Hypothecation dated 16.12.2017. A-8

9. Acknowledgement of debts dated 16.12.2017. A-9

10. Acknowledgement of debts dated 03.12.2020. A-10

11. Sanction Letter dated 21.03.2016. A-11

12. Demand Promissory Note Rs.15 Lakh dated 21.03.2016. A-12

13. Letter of Authorization dated 26.05.2016. A-13

14. Installment letter dated 21.03.2016. A-14

15. Omnibus Undertaking dated 21.03.2016. A-15

16. Hypothecation cum loan agreement dated 21.03.2016. A-16

17. Acknowledgement of Debts dated 19.03.2019. A-17

18. Recall/Demand Notice dated 01.05.2019. A-18

19. Statement of accounts along with certificate under the bankers’ book evidence Act. Dated 17.07.2021. A-19

20. Power of Attorney dated 09.05.2019. A-20

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil- List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

SCHEDULE

-Nil-

Sd/-

(S.V. GOWRAMMA)

PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI