Allowed

Canara Bank v. Smt. Ningamma

DRT15 Nov 2023OA/909/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Applicant Bank's Order Application seeking recovery of Rs. 37,98,316/- along with interest and costs. The bank proved its case via affidavit and documents; the respondents were absent, and the application was disposed of ex parte.

What did the court decide?

Ordered the application allowed with interest and costs. Directed the Deputy Registrar to issue a recovery certificate. Granted liberty to sell immovable mortgaged properties and proceed against other

Canara Bank versus Smt. Ningamma — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL - I, KARNATAKA

¶2

AT BENGALURU

¶3

Dated this the 1sth day of Novembet,2023

¶4

Present: Sri Imtiaz Ali

Presiding officer

OA No.909/2O22

BETWEEN:

CANARA BANK

Branch Offices called

¶10

Basaralu Branch at Basaralu Village Mandya District - 577 416 Represented by its lvlanager Sri Dileep Kumar H.P.

¶11

.. APPLICANT

¶12

AND:

¶13

Smt, Ningamma

¶14

Wo.^{Sri lYayannaGowda}

¶15

Aged about 73 years

¶16

2.Sri S.M. Mayanna Gowda

¶17

S/o Sri Mayanna Gowda

¶18

Aged about 53 years

¶19

3.Sri S.M.Nanjaiah S/o Sri Mayanna Gowda Aged about 43 years

¶20

All are R/at Shivapura Village Basaralu Hobli, Mandya Taluk Mandya District, Pini 571 429 DEFENDANTS

¶21

counsels on record/aooeared for:

¶22

: Sri V. Haridas Bhat Applicant Defendants No.1 to 3 i Ex-parte

¶23

FINAL ORDER

¶24

The present OA has been filed by the Applicant Bank

¶25

¶26

OA No.909/2022

¶27

under Section^{19 of theRecoveryof Debts and Bankruptcy} Act, 1993, seeking^{recovery of money of Rs'37,98,316/-} (Rupees Thirty seven^{lakhs NinetyEightThousand} Three Hundred^{Sixteenonly)togetherwith costs,interest'} etc.

¶28

The case of the^{Applicant Bank is that' the} Defendants are^{the Co-borrowershave approachedthe} Applicant^{Bankfor a Loan of RS.4,5O,OOO/-for the purpose of} purchasing Tractor^{and Trailor' Accordingly,the Applicant} Bank has sanctioned^{TractorLoanof Rs 4,50,000/-in favour} of the defendants^{on 22.12.2004'In order to secure the} loan, the^{Defendantshave executeddocuments viz''} Memorandum^{of Agreementfor AgriculturalLoans,Simple} Mortgage Deed,^{Letter ofAuthority, Partlcularsof} Hypothecated^{movables/tractor and Letters of Revivaletc'}

¶29

The^{Applicant Bankfurther submits that, the Defendants} have agreed to^{repay theLoan of Rs 4,5o,Oo0/-in Iyearly} installments^{of Rs.56,250/-eachwith interestpayableas and} when due.^{Further, the Defendantshave agreed to pay} interest on the^{loan amountat the rate of 10 75olo per} annum compounded^{half yearty and they have agreed to pay}

¶30

¶31

oA No.909/2022

¶32

overdue interest at the rate of^{2o/o pet annumover and} above the normal rate of interest in case^{of their defaultin} payment of any one installment or in regularizing or in clearing the amounts as^per the^{terms stipulated.}

¶33

Further, the Defendants have agreed to^repaythe above loan with variable rate of interest,^{as applicablefrom} time to time as^per the directions of the^{HeadOffice/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.

¶34

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.

¶35

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

¶36

¶37

OA No.909/2022

¶38

Applicant Bank that Defendants are liable to pay a total sum of Rs.37,98,316/- (Rupees Thirty Seven lakhs Ninety Eight Thousand Three Hundred Sixteen only).

¶39

After flling this OA, Summons were sent and served to the Defendants through RPAD. When the Defendants were called out, the Defendants remained absent and placed ex pa rte.

¶40

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, The N4anager_ Sri 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.

¶41

No evidence on behalf of the Defendants.

¶42

Arguments of Learned Counsel for the plaintiff/

¶43

Applicant Bank heard and perused the records of the case.

¶44

Following points arise for my consideration:

¶45

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

¶46

1. What Order?

¶47

¶48

OA No.909/2022

¶49

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

¶50

REASONS

¶51

The Manager of the Applicant Bank came to be examined as AW.1. His affidavlt 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.

¶52

L4. Therefore, for these reasons, present OA is to be allowed with costs as sought by the Applicant Bank.

¶53

ORDER

¶54

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

¶55

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

¶56

¶57

OA No.909/2022

¶58

Schedule -Item Nos.1 to 11 Immovable Mortgaged properties as mentioned in the main application in accordance with law as sought by the Applicant Bank in the OA.

¶59

In spite of sale of the Schedule-Item Nos.1 to 11 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.

¶60

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.

¶61

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.

¶62

¶63

OA No.909/2022

¶64

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

¶65

copy of this order to the parties concerned.

¶66

(Dictated to the Stenographer, after its transcription and necessary corrections, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 15th day of November, 2023)

¶67

\ t,v (Imtipz Ali) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Bengaluru

¶68

AN.N,EXURES

¶69

Witness Examin,ed for the Applicant Bank:

¶70

AW.1 : Sri Dileep Kumar H.P.

¶71

The Manager of the Applicant Bank

¶72

List of Pqcuments Exhibited for the Aoolicant Bank:

¶73

Ex.A-1 : Affidavit of AW-1

¶74

Ex.A-2 : List of Documents

¶75

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

¶76

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶77

¶78

List of Pocuments Exhibited for the Defendants:

¶79

¶80

,0^o*' (Imtibi Ali) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Bengaluru

¶81

Canara Bank v. Smt. Ningamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Smt. Ningamma

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

Meghalaya Rural Bank versus Shri Christerfils Shira Cajee

Canara Bank versus M/S Kamla Enterprises and Others

Ms Munshi Ram Roop Lal versus Indian Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Suryakant R Biradar

Icici Bank Limited versus M/S Avatar B Enterprises

Canara Bank versus M/S Sri Udupi Park