Allowed

Canara Bank v. Turntech Technologies

DRT21 Jun 2023MA/87/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's oral application for condonation of a 144-day delay in re-presenting its Original Application. The court directed that costs be levied on the bank's account and that the interest accrued during the defaulted delay period be considered when issuing the Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay granted; levy of interest for the 144-day default period to be considered at the stage of issuing the Recovery Certificate; applicant to bear costs.

Canara Bank versus Turntech Technologies — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

MA No.87/2023 in OASR No.5730/21

¶2

21.06.2023

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL – III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 21^st day of June, 2023

¶6

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

¶7

MA No.87/23 in OASR No.5730/2021

¶8

Canara Bank, SME Ambattur Branch, No.3, M.T.H.Road, Padi, Chennai – 600 050 Rep. by its Chief Manager. .....Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

M/s.Turntech Technologies, Prop.: Mr.M.Lakshman Kumar, S/o.Mr.Jayaraman, No.9, Rathnam Nagar, Padi, Chennai – 600 050.

¶11

Mr.M.Lakshman Kumar, S/o.Mr.Jayaraman, No.56-A, Balaji Nagar, Near Shephered Hospital,

¶12

Ambattur, Chennai – 600 053. ….Respondents

¶13

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.S.Sundaramoorthy Jeyaseelan

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

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

¶16

144 days in re-presenting the Original Application after complying with the office objections.

¶17

It is the case of the petitioner / applicant bank submitted that although the returns were contemplated to be compiled upon within time, as the OA booklet got mixed up

¶18

MA No.87/2023 in OASR No.5730/21 2

¶19

21.06.2023

¶20

with disposed cases, the same could not be represented within time granted by this Tribunal. It is submitted that immediately after tracing out the OA booklet, the same has been re-presented after complying with the returns. Thus submitting, applicant bank prayed for condonation of delay.

¶21

On perusal of records, it is seen that this is an OA filed for recovery of sum of Rs.31,59,790.94p viz., Rs.18,38,143/- in respect of OD Facility, Rs.85,586.22p in respect of CFITL Facility, Rs.83,352.14p in respect of WCTL Facility, Rs.1,99,985.30p in respect of FITL Facility, Rs.9,52,724.28p in respect of MSMETL Facility, together with future interest at the rate of 10.90%, 10.90%, 10.95%, 10.80% and 16.05% respectively per annum with monthly rests 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

However, in the circumstances, this MA is allowed on the condition that the subject of levy of interest for the defaulted period (144 days) which is condoned at this stage of the OA proceedings shall stand for consideration at the time of issuance of

¶23

MA No.87/2023 in OASR No.5730/21 3

¶24

21.06.2023

¶25

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

¶26

the Tribunal.

¶27

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

¶28

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, corrected, signed and processed through E-drt on this the 21^th day of June, 2023)

¶29

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

Canara Bank v. Turntech Technologies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Turntech Technologies

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

Sri Padma balaji Transport versus Canara Bank

Mugebur Rahman versus Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited

Union Bank of India versus Vinoth Kumar

T Pugazhenthy versus Canara Bank

Ms Ganesh Traders No Na Stamp Vendor Street Perambalur versus Karur Vysya Bank

Suresh Tradersrep by Its Sole Proprietor Suresh Kumar versus Karur Vysya Bank