Allowed

M s Indostar Capital Finance Ltd. v. M s M R Garden Services Pvt. Ltd.

DRT13 Mar 2023MA/27/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application for condonation of 197 days delay in re-presenting an original application for debt recovery, on condition that the bank's claim for default interest during the delay period would be considered subsequently during recovery certificate issuance.

What did the court decide?

The application for condonation of delay was allowed subject to the condition that the petitioner bank cannot claim default interest for the delayed period, pending consideration at the stage of Recov

M s Indostar Capital Finance Ltd. versus M s M R… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | DRT (2023)

¶1

MA No.27/2023 in OASR No.3457/2022 1

¶2

13.03.2023

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL – III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 13^th day of March, 2022

¶5

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

¶6

MA No.27/23 in OASR No.3457/2022

¶7

M/s.Indostar Capital Finance Limited, SME Finance, Chennai branch, Rep. by its Area Collection Head, No.22 & 23, Venkatnarayana Road,

¶8

T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. .....Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

M/s.M.R.Garden Services Private Limited, Rep. by its Managing Director, A.P.Ravi, No.18, Kannan Street, Kadaperi Village, Tambaram Sanatorium, Chennai – 600 044.

¶11

Mr.A.P.Ravi, S/o.Pakkirisamy Geeyam Precioso Apartments, ‘B’ Block, No.10, Kamaraj Salai, Krishnapuri, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028.

¶12

Mrs.R.Manju, W/o.A.P.Ravi, Geeyam Precioso Apartments, ‘B’ Block, No.10, Kamaraj Salai, Krishnapuri, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028.

¶13

Mrs.K.Ponnammal, W/o.late.Krishnan, No.3/189, East Coast Road, Vettuvankeni,

¶14

Chennai – 600 119. ….Defendants

¶15

MA No.27/2023 in OASR No.3457/2022 2

¶16

13.03.2023

¶17

Counsel for Petitioner bank: M/s.C.P.R. Kamaraj

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This MA is filed by the Petitioner / Applicant Bank for condonation of delay of 197 days in re-presenting the Original Application after complying with the office objections.

¶20

It is the case of the petitioner / applicant bank that the objections were duly contemplated to be complied upon however as branch could not furnish the required papers to counsel on record for re-presenting the OA within time, they could not represent the OA within time granted by this Tribunal and therefore prays to condone the delay.

¶21

On perusal of records, it is seen that this is an OA filed for recovery of sum of Rs.3,03,76,903/- together with future interest at the rate of 12% p.a. compounded monthly 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.

¶22

MA No.27/2023 in OASR No.3457/2022 3

¶23

13.03.2023

¶24

However, in the circumstances, this MA is allowed on the condition that the subject of levy of interest for the defaulted period (197 days) which is condoned at this 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

¶25

the Tribunal.

¶26

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

¶27

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, corrected, signed and processed through E-drt on this the 13^th day of March, 2023)

¶28

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

M s Indostar Capital Finance Ltd. v. M s M R Garden Services Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M s Indostar Capital Finance Ltd. v. M s M R Garden Services Pvt. Ltd.

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

M Deepa versus State Bank of India

Idbi Bank versus Sasikala

M s City Union Bank Limited versus M s Mohith Chemicals

South Indian Bank versus Thavaselvi Ashokan

M s Green Trendz Super Market versus Union Bank of India

Bank of India versus Shanthi