S.Nandha Kumar v. Indian Bank

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23.10.2024 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY & C.M.P.No.6970 of 2020

1. S.Nandakumar

2. N.Kannan

3. S.Radhika ..

Petitioners Vs.

1. Indian Bank Purasawakkam Branch 19, Narayana Guru Road Chennai 600 112 Rep. by its Assistant General Manager.

2. M/s. S&S Industries and Enterprises Limited A-3 I Main Road, Industrial Estate Ambattur, Chennai 600 058 Now at 204, SIDCO AIEMA Tower First Main Road, Ambattur Industrial Estate Chennai 600 058.

3. A.R.Santhanakrishnan

4. V.S.Narayanan

5. M.S.Venkataraman

6. V.Kesavan

7. S.Natarajan

8. R.Ramani 9.T.V.Babu 10.The Branch Manager State Bank of India Commercial Branch, 232, NSC Bose Road Chennai 600 001.

11.The Branch Manager The Vysya Bank Limited 185, Mount Road, Chennai 600 006.

12.The Branch Manager Oriental Bank of Commerce Spencer Plaza, 769, Mount Road Chennai 600 002.

13.The Branch Manager Punjab National Bank 17, Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001.

14.The Branch Manager IDBI Bank Limited P.M. Towers, 37, Greams Road Chennai 600 006.

15.The Branch Manager ICICI Limited No.1, Cenetoph Road, Teynampet Chennai 600 018.

16.The Branch Manager Industrial Development Bank of India 115 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 015.

..

Respondents

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order dated 06.08.2019 passed in O.A.No.92 of 2010 on the file of Debts Recovery Tribunal III.

For Petitioners :

Mr.P.H.Arvind Pandian Senior Counsel For Mr.C.V.Shailandhran For Respondents :

Mr.P.V.Muralidhar for Respondent-1 Mr.K.Balamurali For Shivakumar & Suresh for Respondents 14 & 16 No appearance for Respondents 4, 5, 10-13 & 15 Not ready in notice for Respondents 2, 3 & 6-9

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) The prayer in the petition is to set aside the order dated 06.08.2019 of Debts Recovery Tribunal - III in O.A.No.92 of 2010.

2. Counsel for first respondent states that the prayer is not rightly worded and should be restricted only to petitioners. Mr.Pandian agrees with counsel for first respondent that the impugned order should be set aside only to the extent it applies to petitioners. Having said this, counsel for first respondent, in fairness, concedes that the order dated 10.02.2020 passed in C.R.P.No.546 of 2020 and C.M.P.No.2809 of 2020 would apply to petitioners also since petitioners were similarly situate as petitioners in the said matter.

3. We have also considered the impugned order and we are also satisfied that there is no evidence to show petitioners were guarantors. Admitting to the loan given to the company will not make petitioners as guarantors. Therefore, the impugned order dated 06.08.2019 to the extent it is applicable to petitioners is quashed and set aside. Petitioners are discharged of any personal liability whatsoever.

4. Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, interim application stands closed. (K.R.SHRIRAM, CJ) (SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J.) 23.10.2024 Index :

Yes/No :

Yes/No kpl To The Registrar Debts Recovery Tribunal III Chennai.

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J.

(kpl) 23.10.2024