Allowed

Canara Bank v. Mrs M Sellam

DRT8 May 2023MA/57/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an application for condonation of delay in re-presenting an Original Application for recovery. The court imposed the condition that interest accrued during the condoned delay period will be considered at the time of issuing the Recovery Certificate to penalize the bank's inaction. The matter was otherwise disposed of by permitting the Registry to proceed.

What did the court decide?

The application for condonation of delay was allowed on the condition that interest for the defaulted period will be considered at the time of issuance of the Recovery Certificate.

Canara Bank versus Mrs M Sellam — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

MA No.57/2023 in OASR No.7684/2021 1

¶2

08.05.2023

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL – III, CHENNAI

¶4

Dated this the 08^th day of May, 2023

¶5

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

¶6

MA No.57/23 in OASR No.7684/2021

¶7

Canara Bank, Thirumazhapadi Branch, Rep. by its Manager, No.4, Main Road, Thirumazhapadi, Ariyalur – 621 851. .....Applicant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Mrs.M.Selvam, W/o.Shri.R.Manickam, Middle Street, Keezhakavattankurichi Village & Post, Ariyalur Taluk, Ariyalur District – 621 715.

¶10

Mr.M.Saminathan S/o.Shri.R.Manickam, Middle Street, Keezhakavattankurichi Village & Post, Ariyalur Taluk, Ariyalur District – 621 715.

¶11

Mr.M.Velmurugan S/o.Shri.R.Manickam, Middle Street, Keezhakavattankurichi Village & Post, Ariyalur Taluk, Ariyalur District – 621 715.

¶12

Mrs.K.Saroja, W/o.Shri.P.Kumar, Middle Street, Keezhakavattankurichi Village & Post, Ariyalur Taluk, Ariyalur District – 621 715. ….Defendants

¶13

MA No.57/2023 in OASR No.7684/2021

¶14

¶15

08.05.2023

¶16

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.M.Muthukumaran

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This MA is filed by the Petitioner / Applicant Bank for condonation of delay of

¶19

338 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 tracing out of vital document, to be filed along with original application took considerable time and could be traced out only after a certain point of time, they could not re-present 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.39,31,728/- together with future interest at the rate of 16.55% 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 defendants. 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.57/2023 in OASR No.7684/2021 3

¶23

08.05.2023

¶24

However, in the circumstances, this MA is allowed on the condition that the subject of levy of interest for the defaulted period (338 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 the Tribunal.

¶25

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

¶26

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, corrected, signed and processed through E-drt on this the 08^th day of May, 2023)

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

Canara Bank v. Mrs M Sellam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Mrs M Sellam

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

Mr N Thiruvengadam versus M s Orix Leasing And Financial Services India Limited

Vsr Devadass versus Indian Bank

Lakshmi Prabhavathi a Wife of Sukumaran versus Punjab National Bank

M S K Rameshraj versus Indian Overseas Bank

State Bank of India versus Mrs R Ayyammal

P Rajavel versus Bank of Maharashtra