Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/S Sukrithi Ventures

DRT24 Aug 2023MA/104/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed a Miscellaneous Appeal filed by a bank to condone a 318-day delay in re-presenting an Original Application. The court levied no costs but directed that interest for the delayed period be considered later at the time of issuing a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 318 days condoned subject to deferred consideration of interest for that period at the stage of Recovery Certificate.

Canara Bank versus M/S Sukrithi Ventures — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

MA No.104/2023 in OASR No.3491/2023

¶2

24.08.2023

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL – III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 24^th day of August, 2023

¶6

Present: Shri Ganapathi K.R.K. Presiding Officer

¶7

MA No. 104/23 in OASR No.3491/2023

¶8

Canara Bank, Mount Road Branch, Rep. by its Manager, RAYALA TOWERS, No. 781-785, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. .....Petitioner

¶9

-Vs.-

¶10

M/s. Sukrithi Ventures Represented by its Proprietrix Mrs. T. Mageswari, Ground Floor, Plot No. 12, Kandigai Street, Kolathur, Chennai – 600 076. Also at, Mrs. T. Mageswari, Orchid Springs Apartment, No. 1119, 11^th Floor Maple Block, No.54, Canal Road, Koratur, Chennai – 600 076. 2. Mrs. T. Mageswari, W/o Mr. A. Muthuvel, Ground Floor, Plot No. 12, Kandigai Street, Kolathur, Chennai – 600 076 Also at, Mrs. T. Mageswari, Orchid Springs Apartment, No. 1119, 11^th Floor Maple Block, No.54, Canal Road, Koratur, Chennai – 600 076. ….Defendants Counsel for Applicant : M/s. Akshai Mani

¶11

MA No.104/2023 in OASR No.3491/2023

24.08.2023

O R D E R

This MA is filed by the Petitioner / Applicant Bank for condonation of delay of 318 days in re-presenting the Original Application after complying with the office objections.

¶16

It is the case of the petitioner / applicant bank that as erstwhile counsel underwent medical treatment, they could not process the returns. Subsequently, case was entrusted to the present counsel, who filed change of vakalat. Hence, they could not re-present the OA within time granted by this Tribunal and therefore prays to condone the delay.

¶17

On perusal of records, it is seen that this is an OA filed for recovery of sum of Rs.55,57,940/- together with future interest at the rate of 9.85% p.a., 9.85% p.a. and 8.25% p.a. due under SOD, Covid FITL and TL facilities from defendants. It is not explained anywhere in the petition as to how applicant bank will be entitled to claim interest at the contractual rate for the period of delay, which is owing to their inaction and not attributable to any action of the defendant. As the period of delay is on the very high side, condonation of the same by levying formal amount in the form of costs payable either to the Library Fund or to any Charity organization as a measure of reprimand would not be justifiable when compared with the levy of interest burden on the defendants for the period of default on the part of the applicant bank for no fault of the borrower.

¶18

However, in the circumstances, this MA is allowed on the condition that the subject of levy of interest for the defaulted period (318 days) which is condoned at this

¶19

MA No.104/2023 in OASR No.3491/2023

¶20

¶21

24.08.2023

¶22

stage of the OA proceedings shall stand for consideration at the time of issuance of Recovery Certificate by the progress of the case and the conduct of the case on behalf of the applicant bank till the stage of issuance of the recovery certificate. Registry is directed to put up a note accordingly for consideration of claim of interest for this default period at the time of drawing of the Recovery Certificate in case for an order thereto by the Tribunal.

¶23

Registry is directed to number the OA, if otherwise found to be in order.

¶24

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, corrected, signed and processed through E-drt on this the 24^th day of August, 2023)

¶25

Sd/- (GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. M/S Sukrithi Ventures

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/S Sukrithi Ventures

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Juspus Shalin versus Indian Overseas Bank

Benon Shalin versus Indian Overseas Bank

Venus Exports versus Jana Small Finance Bank Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Om Sri Sidhivinayagar Agency

State Bank of India versus Saai Sharavanan

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) versus Ms Jothi Traders Prop Mrs R Schitra