Allowed

Canara Bank v. Revamma

DRT16 Nov 2023OA/906/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Debt Recovery Tribunal order allowed an Original Application filed by Canara Bank for recovery of a loan of Rs.25.75 lakhs from three co-borrowers. The tribunal accepted the bank's affidavit evidence, noting the defendants' absence, and issued a recovery certificate allowing sale of mortgaged properties.

What did the court decide?

Original application allowed; recovery certificate to be issued; liberty to sell mortgaged properties and proceed against other assets.

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

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL^. I, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this the 16th day of November,2023

¶4

Present: Sri Imtiaz Ali

Presiding Officer

OA No.90612022

BETWEEN:

CANARA BANK

Branch Offices called

¶10

Basaralu Branch at Basaralu Village Mandya District - 571 416 Represented by its Manager Sri Dileep Kumar H.P.

.. APPLICANT

AND:

1.Smt. Revamma

Wo.^{Sri Dasappa} Aged about 62 years

¶15

2.Sri Dasappa

¶16

S/o Sri Dasappa Aged about 67 years

¶17

3.Sri S.D, Venkatesha S/o Sri Dasappa Aged about 45 years

¶18

All are Vat Sathanur Village Kasaba Hobli, Mandya Taluk Mandya District, Pini 5714O2 DEFENDANTS

¶19

counsels on record/aopeared fori Applicant : Sri V. Haridas Bhat Defendants No.1 to 3 i Ex-parte

¶20

FINAL ORDER

¶21

The present OA has been filed by the Applicant Bank

¶22

¶23

oA No.906/2022

¶24

under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, seeking recovery of money of Rs.ZS,7S,l26/(Rupees Twenty Five lakhs Seventy Five Thousand One Hundred Twenty Six only) together with costs, interest, etc,

¶25

The case of the Applicant Bank is that, the Defendants are the Co-borrowers and in the year 2OO5 they have approached the Applicant Bank for a Loan of Rs.4,75,000/- for the purpose of purchasing Tractor and Trailor. Accordingly, the Applicant Bank has sanctioned Tractor Loan of Rs.4,75,000/- in favour of the defendants under Loan Account No.1297856003282 on 11.01.2005. In order to secure the loan, the Defendants have executed documents viz., lvlemorandum of Agreement for Agricultural Loans, Simple Mortgage Deed, Letter of Authority, particulars of Hypothecated movables/tractor and Letters of Revival etc.

¶26

The Applicant Bank has further submits that, the Defendants have agreed to repay the Loan of Rs.4,75,OOO/-in 8 yearly installments of Rs.59,375l- each with interest payable as and when due. Further, the Defendants have agreed to pay interest on the loan amount at the rate of

¶27

OA No.906/2022

¶28

70.75o/o per annum compounded half yearly and they have agreed to pay overdue interest at the rate of 2olo per annum over and above the normal rate of interest in case of their default in payment of any one installment or in regularizing or in clearing the amounts as per the terms stipulated.

¶29

Further, the Defendants have agreed to repay the above loan with variable rate of interest, 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.

¶30

The Defendants after utilizing the said loan facility granted by the Applicant Bank, they did not repay the principal amount as well as the interest. The Applicant Bank several times demanded the repayment of the loan. Further, the loan account of the defendants became overdue and Non- Performing Asset (N.p.A.) in terms of R.B.I. guidelines. Thereafter, on 25.04.2022, the Applicant Bank got issued Legal Notice to the defendants. Though the said Legal Notice was served on the defendants, they failed to repay the loan.

¶31

¶32

OA No.906/2022

¶33

In the light of these factors, it is contended by the Applicant Bank that Defendants are liable to^{pay a total sum} of Rs.25,7 5,L261- (Rupees Twenty Five lakhs Seventy Five Thousand One Hundred Twenty Six only).

¶34

7, After filing this OA, Summons were sent and served to the Defendants through RPAD. When the^{Defendantswere} called out, the Defendants remained absent and^placed ex parte.

¶35

To^prove the case of the Applicant Bank, The Managersri Dileep Kumar H.P. has filed his affidavit by way of evidence and 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 14 documents came to be marked at Ex.A3 to A16.

¶36

No evidence on behalf of the Defendants.

¶37

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

¶38

11. Following^polnts arise for my consideration:

¶39

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

¶40

¶41

oA No.906/2022

¶42

What Order?

¶43

L2, For the following reasons, I answer the above_ referred points in the following manner:

¶44

REASONS

¶45

The Manager of the Applicant Bank came to be examined as AW.1. His affidavit by way of evidence reiterated the facts pleaded in the plaint and his affidavit is also corroborated by the above-referred Ex.A3 to A16 which clearly establish the case of the Applicant Bank to allow the present OA. Added to this, the Defendants have remained absent and hence they were placed ex parte. Therefore, it is to be construed that Defendants have admitted the entire case pleaded by the Applicant Bank in the present OA.

¶46

t4. Therefore, for these reasons, present OA is to be allowed with costs as sought by the Applicant Bank.

¶47

ORDER

¶48

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

¶49

OA No.906/2022

¶50

In the event of failure of the Defendant to pay the said OA amount, the Applicant Bank is at liberty to sell the Schedule -Item Nos.1 to 5 Immovable Mortgaqed^properties as mentioned in the main application in accordance with law as sought by the Applicant Bank in the OA.

¶51

In spite of sale of the Schedule-Item Nos.1 to 5 Immovable Mortgaged Properties as mentioned in the main application, 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.

¶52

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

¶53

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.

¶54

¶55

OA No.906/2022

¶56

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

¶57

copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶58

(Dictated to the Stenographer, after its transcription and necessary corrections, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 16rh day of November, 2023)

¶59

ANNEXURES

¶60

(Imtiaz Ali) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Bengaluru

¶61

AW-1 Sri Dileep Kumar H.p.

¶62

The Manager of the Applicant Bank

¶63

Ex.A-1 : Affidavit of AW-1

¶64

Ex.A-2

¶65

: List of Docu ments

¶66

Ex.A-3 to A-16 : 14 documents

¶67

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶68

Nit -

¶69

Nit-

¶70

*o*' (rmtiai Ati) Presiding Officer DRT-f, Bengaluru

¶71

Canara Bank v. Revamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Revamma

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 Ms T D Enterprise

State Bank of India versus Jagriti Dubey

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Sandhya Sanitary and Others

Sri B Pattabhiram Singh versus Federal Bank

Bank of India versus Sh. Jatinder Singh

Ms Stark Industries versus Bank of Baroda (Dena Bank)