Allowed

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) v. Karthik

DRT6 Jun 2023OA/11/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the Original Application filed by Canara Bank (formerly Syndicate Bank) against two defendants. Intermediary witnesses were examined. The bank was ordered to recover the principal amount with accrued and future interest, with liberty to sell mortgaged and personal assets if unrecovered.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 36,50,000 plus interest at 12.65% p.a. with liberty to sell mortgaged and personal assets.

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) versus Karthik — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 6^th Day of June, 2023

¶3

Present: SMT. S. V. GOWRAMMA

¶4

Hon`ble Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.11/2022

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

Canara Bank, (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), KGF Branch, B.M. Road, Robertsonpet, KGF-563 122. Represented by its Chief Manager,

¶8

… APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Sri. G. Karthik S/o Sri. V. Ganesh Aged about 38 years,

¶11

Smt. Chitra K W/o Sri. G. Karthik Aged about 32 years

¶12

Both Defendants are R/at. No. 104, Ganeshpuram, Robertsonpet, KGF-563 122. ... DEFENDANTS

¶13

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶14

Applicant : Sri. Ramanand Achar, Defendant Nos. 1 & 2 : Exparte

¶15

FINAL ORDER

¶16

The present Original Application (OA) is filed on 30.12.2021 under section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial

¶17

¶18

OA. 11/2022

¶19

Institutions Act 1993 for recovery of a sum of Rs.36,50,000/- (Rupees thirty six lakh fifty thousand Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the defendants.

¶20

The application filed is within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993, and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Tribunal.

¶21

Brief facts of the case:

¶22

The present OA is filed by Syndicate Bank and in view of amalgamation with Canara Bank, as per the Government Notification, the claim of Syndicate Bank is continued by Canara Bank.

¶23

In the case of the applicant bank that the Defendant Nos.1 Borrower, Defendant No.2 Guarantor, had approached the Applicant Bank for Overdraft Facility for sum of Rs.17,00,000/- an application dated 19.05.2016 for the purpose of Agricultural Activities. After Considering the request of the Defendants, the applicant bank has sanctioned the Overdraft Facility for sum of Rs.17,00,000/- (Rupees seventy lakh only) on 20.05.2016, The loan was tenable for a period of 1 year from date of availing the loan and interest to be paid as and when due. The defendants agreed to repay the interest @ 11.65% p.a. compounded monthly and also agree d to pay overdue interest of 2%

¶24

¶25

OA. 11/2022

¶26

p.a. in case of defaults in payments.

¶27

The defendants executed necessary loan documents in favour of the applicant bank as security for the due repayment of the loans, interest, cost and charges, and Defendants executed Composite Hypothecation Agreement dated 20.05.2016 and Regd. Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 05.05.2016 and 2^nd Defendant executed Guarantee Agreement dated 20.05.2016 in favour of the applicant bank.

¶28

The Applicant Bank submits that the Defendants, after availing

¶29

the said facilities, failed to repay the loan amount and committed default. The Applicant bank issued a Securitization Notice on 22.02.2017 calling upon the defendants to repay the entire outstanding loan amount. The default in repayment continued and there was no positive response from the defendants. Hence, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the defendants.

¶30

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the Defendant Nos.1 & 2 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due and the summons were duly returned unserved with postal shara “Refused”. When OA was taken up on 01.02.2023 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants; hence, Defendant Nos. 1 & 2 were placed exparte on 01.02.2023.

¶31

¶32

OA. 11/2022

¶33

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶34

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Sri. C. Prabhanjan Reddy S/o C. Shankar Reddy, Manager has filed his Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW.1 and marked as Ex.A1, the list of Document came to be marked as Ex.A2 and documents came to be marked as Ex.A3 to A9. As the defendant remained exparte, the OA claim remains unchallenged. There is no contra evidence available on record to repudiate the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶35

Having regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied, the

¶36

conduct and operations in the account and the default committed, this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled to a final order on the following terms:

¶37

: O R D E R:

¶38

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶39

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from Defendant Nos.1 & 2

¶40

jointly and severally to pay the Rs.36,50,000/- (Rupees thirty six lakh

¶41

¶42

OA. 11/2022

¶43

fifty thousand Only) along with current & Future interest @ 12.65% p.a.

¶44

compounded monthly from 30.12.2021 and till the date of realization.

¶45

(b) In the event of failure of the defendants to pay the aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of the schedule mentioned property in the OA;

¶46

¶47

(d) If the sale proceeds of the schedule mentioned mortgaged

¶48

properties are not sufficient to satisfy the dues as ordered above, the applicant bank is at liberty to sell the personal assets of the defendants (both movable and immovable) to recover the balance dues as required under law;

¶49

(e) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the defendants duly considering the amounts, if any, paid by the defendants and/or amount realized by sale of assets etc., during the intervening period after

¶50

the filing of the OA, enabling the Registry to prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by defendants to the applicant bank.

¶51

¶52

OA. 11/2022

¶53

(f) The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the

¶54

date of this final order.

¶55

(g) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the

¶56

Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

¶57

10. A copy of this order be communicated to the parties concerned.

¶58

[Dictated to the (CS), transcribed by her, corrected and signed by me on this the 6^th Day of June 2023].

¶59

Sd/PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

¶60

ANNEXURES

¶61

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶62

AW-1: Sri. C. Prabhanjan Reddy S/o C. Shankar Reddy, Manager of Applicant Bank.

¶63

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶64

Exhibit Nos.	Particulars of Documents	Date
A1	Applicant Evidence
A2	List of Documents.
A3	Loan Application	19.05.2016
A4	Composite Hypothecation Agreement	20.05.2016
A5	Guarantee Agreement	20.05.2016
A6	Regd. Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds	05.05.2016
A7	Acknowledgement of Debt	26.09.2017
A8	Securitization Notice	22.07.2017
A9	Account Extract (OCC)

¶65

¶66

OA. 11/2022

¶67

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶68

-Nil -

¶69

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶70

-Nil -

¶71

SCHEDULE “A”

¶72

Stocks, Book Debts, Furniture & Fixtures, Utensils etc., belonging to the 1^st Defendant- Mr. Karthik G, No.104, Ganeshpuram, Robetsonpet, KFG563 122.

¶73

SCHEDULE “B”

¶74

All that part and parcel of residential property being residential building and premises situated at Nachapalli (Palkar Huts) Robertsonpet, K.G.F., Robertsonpet Hobli, Bangarpet Taluk, within the Robertsonpet City Muncipal Limits bearing Katha No.1273, Assessment No. 1327, measuring East to West 30 Feet and North to South 20 Feet and bounded on the:

¶75

East by: Property of P.A. Ramaswamy Naidu,

¶76

West by: Private Property

¶77

North by: Flour Mill of P.A. Ramaswamy Naidu South by: 20 feet road and then properties of P.A. Ramaswamy Naidu.

¶78

The property belongs to the 1^st Defendant- Mr. Karthik G, No. 104, Ganeshpuram, Robertsonpet, KFG-563 122.

¶79

Sd/PRESIDING OFFICER

¶80

¶81

OA. 11/2022

¶82

DRT-II, BENGALURU

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) v. Karthik

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) v. Karthik

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Canara Bank versus M/s. Extreme Motors

Joginder Singh versus Punjab National Bank

Icici Bank Limited versus Sh. Virender Verma

M/S Javid Sheep Import Export versus Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited

M/S Ramdeo Traders Proprietor Uday Subhaschandra Bothra versus Icici Bank Limited

Smt Kokila Wo Gajananrao Shete versus Indian Bank