Allowed

Canara Bank v. Smt. Meenakshamma

DRT11 Oct 2023OA/1382/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's Original Application for recovery of Rs. 32,66,419 including interest and costs against the debtor who appeared ex parte, permitting subsequent sale of schedule property.

What did the court decide?

OA allowed with interest and costs; liberty to sell schedule property; liberty to proceed against other properties; direction to issue Recovery Certificate.

Canara Bank versus Smt. Meenakshamma — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEATS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this the 11th day of October, 2023

¶3

present: Sri htiaz Ali

presiding Officer

oA No.1382/2022

BETWEEN:

Canara Bank

Chitradurga Main Branch SIM Dental College Complex B.D. Road

¶9

chitradurga 577 501

¶10

Represented by its Senior Manager and Power of Attorney Holder Sri K. Nagendra

¶11

.. APPLICANT

¶12

AND:

¶13

Smt. Meenakshamma Wo.^{Late C. Thippeswamy} Residino at - Channaina Hatty Iyyanahalli Post Chitradurga Taluk chitradurga District

¶14

,, DEFENDANT

¶15

Counsels on record/aDDeared for:

¶16

Applicant : Sri H.S.Rukkoji Rao Defendant i Ex^parte

¶17

FINAL ORDER

¶18

The present OA has been filed by the Applicant Bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act. 1993, seeking recovery of money ot Rs.32,66,4L9 / -

¶19

¶20

OA No.13A2/2022

¶21

(Rupees thirty-two lakhs sixty-six thousand four hundred and nineteen only) together with costs, interest, etc.

¶22

The case of the Applicant Bank is that Sri Channappa was old customer of the Applicant Bank who was availing credit facilities by mortgaging the schedule property in favour of the Applicant Bank. It is pertinent to mention the Sri Chanappa availed loan of Rs.2,52,OOO/- on 13.12.1996. Again the Sri Chanappa availed agricultural loan of Rs.2,29,500/- from the Applicant Bank. Further, Sri Channappa and his son Sri C. Thippe Swamy have approached the Applicant Bank seeking a Farm Machinery Loan for the purpose of purchasing a Tractor, Trailer and other accessories. The Applicant Bank has considered the request of the Sri Channappa and Sri C. Thippe Swamy and sanctioned a Farm Machinery Loan of Rs.5,46,000/- on 24.03.200A, in terms of the loan agreements, In order to secure the loans. Sri Channappa and Sri C. Thippe Swamy have executed documents, viz., Letter of evidencing deposit of title deeds, The memorandum of agreement,^particulars of machinery/equipment's hypothecated, Certificate of Registration relating to tractor & trailer and Letters of

¶23

¶24

OA No.1382/2022

¶25

Revival. Sri C. Thippeswamy died intestate on 22.03.2013 leaving behind his wife Smt. Meenakshamma as his legal heir. Sri Channappa died intestate on 15.10.2020 leaving his daughter in law i.e., the Defendant to inherit his estate.

¶26

3, Further, the Defendant has agreed to repay the above loans with variable rate of interests, as applicable from time to time as per the directions of the Head Office/Central Office of the Applicant Bank and penal interest in case of default and keep the accounts regular by paying installments as and when due to the satisfaction of the Applicant Bank, as detailed in the OA by the Applicant Bank.

¶27

The Defendant after utilising the said loans has failed and neglected to make the repayment of the loans due as agreed and Defendant has not serviced the interest thereon as per the terms and condition agreed by the Defendant. The Officials of the Applicant Bank have approached the Defendant on several occasions and demanded to regularise the loan account but the Defendant is postponing the same on One Or the Other pretext, Hence the recovery process is initiated to recover the dues.

¶28

In the light of these factors, it is contended by the

OA No.1382/2022

Applicant Bank that Defendant is liable to pay a total sum of Rs,32,66,419 / - (Rupees thirty-two lakhs sixty-six thousand four hundred and nineteen only)

¶33

After filing this OA. Summons was sent and served to the Defendant through RPAD. When the Defendant is called out, the Defendant remained absent and placed ex parte.

¶34

fo prove the case of the Applicant Bank, its Chief Manager, Smt. Valarmathi B. Shankar, has filed her affidavit by way of evidence the same was considered as evidence of AW.1 and marked at Ex.A1 and list of documents came to be marked at Ex.A2 and 17 documents came to be marked at Ex.A3 to A19.

¶35

No evidence on behalf of the Defendant.

¶36

Arguments of Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff/ Applicant Bank heard and perused the records of the case.

¶37

Following points arise for my consideration:

¶38

1. Whether Plaintiff/Applicant Bank proves its case as contended in the^{plaint/application?}

¶39

¶40

what Order?

¶41

OA No-738212022

¶42

For the following reasons, I answer the abovereferred points in the following manner:

¶43

REASONS

¶44

L2. The Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank came to be examined as AW.1. Her affidavit by way of evidence reiterated the facts pleaded in the plaint and her affidavit is also corroborated by the above-referred Ex.A3 to A19 which clearly establish the case of the Applicant Bank to allow the present OA. Added to this, the Defendant has remained absent, hence it is to be construed that Defendant has admitted the entire case pleaded by the Applicant Bank in the present oA.

¶45

Therefore, for these reasons, present OA is to be allowed with costs as sought by the Applicant Bank.

¶46

ORDER

¶47

Present OA stands allowed as^prayed for with interest and costs.

¶48

In the event of failure of the Defendants to pay the said OA amount, the Applicant Bank is at liberty to sell the

¶49

¶50

OA No.7382/2022

¶51

Schedule property in accordance with law as sought by the Applicant Bank in the OA.

¶52

In spite of sale of the schedule property, if the OA amount is not fully realised, then the Applicant Bank is at liberty to proceed against the persons and other properties of the Defendants in accordance with law.

¶53

Applicant Bank shall file latest Memo of Calculation of OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by Defendant duly taking into account the amount/s, if any, paid by the Defendant and/or amount realised by sale of assets, etc., during. the intervening period after filing the OA, to enable the office to prepare Recovery Certiflcate for the amount to be paid by the Defendant to the Applicant Bank.

¶54

Office is directed to issue Recovery Certificate as sought by the Applicant Bank in the OA and do the needful as required under the law forthwith.

¶55

The Office is directed to issue, as far as possible, free

¶56

copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶57

(Dictated to the Stenographer, after its transcription and necessary corrections, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 11h day of Qctober, 2023) I

¶58

(Imliaz Ati) Presiding Officer DRT-f, Bengaluru

¶59

OA No.1382/2022

¶60

ANNEXURES

¶61

Witness Examined for the Aoolicant Bank: AW-1 : Smt. Valarmathi B. Shankar

¶62

The Chief Manager of Applicant Bank

¶63

List of Documents Exhibited for the Aooticant Bank: Ex.A-I : Affidavit of AW-1 Ex.A-2 : List of Documents

¶64

Ex.A-3 to A-19 : 17 documents

¶65

Witness Examined for the Defendant:

¶66

Nit -

¶67

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant:

¶68

Nit\Y'i,0" (Imttaz Ali) Presiding Officer DRT-f, Bengaluru

¶69

Canara Bank v. Smt. Meenakshamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Smt. Meenakshamma

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

Uco Bank versus Messers B K J Enterprise

Punjab National Bank versus M/S M S Hardware

Icici Bank Limited versus Ajay Devanand Gadpayle

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Bhawani International

State Bank of India versus Sh. Karam Singh

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Joshi International