Allowed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Ms. N. Seerisha

DRT22 May 2023TA/193/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application by HDFC Bank Limited for recovery of a business loan default against N. Seerisha. The bank filed proof under Section 19(1) of the RDB Act. The tribunal found the claim established and ordered the issue of a recovery certificate for Rs. 22,25,775.95 plus future interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued to the Recovery Officer for realization of Rs. 22,25,775.95 plus interest and costs.

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Ms. N. Seerisha — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2023)

¶1

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II AT CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 22^nd day of May, 2023

¶3

PRESENT: SHRI T. RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

TA No.193 of 2022

¶5

(Originally filed before DRT-I Chennai as OA No.12 of 2022 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.193 of 2022)

¶6

HDFC Bank Limited No.128, Nelson Manickam Road East West Centre, Ground Floor Aminjikarai, Chennai – 600 029

¶7

Also Having Office at “CEEBROS” 110, 2^nd Floor, Nelson Manickam Road Aminjikarai, Chennai – 600 029 Represented by its Authorised Signatory Mr. P. Nirmalraj …Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Ms. N. Seerisha D/o Swamynathan Narayanaswamy D. No. C-139, 1^st Floor, SIS Danuse Apartments Jayachandran Nagar 1^st Main Road Pallikaranai, Near By Jeyachandran Shop Chennai – 600 100

¶10

And Having Office at Himalaya Enterprises 7-101, Ground Floor, VGP Santhi Nagar 1^st Main Road, Narayanapuram Pallikaranai, Behind IOB Bank Chennai – 600 100

¶11

Having Permanent Address at 31-451, Ram Nagar Dharmavaram, Ananthapur Andhra Pradesh – 515 671 …Defendant Counsel for the Applicant Bank : Mr. T.K.M. Sai Krishnan Counsel for Defendant : Ex-parte

¶12

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

This application is filed by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendant for recovery of an aggregate sum of Rs.22,25,775.95p with interest at the rate of 17% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of the OA till the date of realization in full along with costs of this application.

¶15

The subject matter of the case is the “Business Loan” availed by the defendant from the applicant bank.

¶16

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant approached the applicant bank for grant of Business Loan vide Loan Application dated 18.07.2019 and the applicant considering the said request sanctioned a loan of Rs.20,00,000/- to the defendant under Loan Account No.92629794. It is also the case of the applicant that the defendant in order to secure the said loan executed Loan Agreement dated 29.07.2019 and Customer SI Debit Authorisation Form & Forex Un-hedged Exposure Letter. It is stated that the said loan was repayable in 46 equated monthly installments of Rs.71,305/- each commencing from 6.9.2019 and ends on 06.06.2023.

¶17

It is the case of the applicant that the defendant having availed the credit facilities defaulted in repayments and failed to regularize the loan account despite repeated demands and also failed to comply with the terms and conditions of sanction and therefore the applicant sent a legal notice dated 11.3.2021 calling

¶18

¶19

upon the defendant to clear the outstanding dues. It is stated that the said notice was received at the first address on 13.3.2021, returned with endorsement “No such person” at office address and with endorsement “Refused” and the third address on 18.3.2021 respectively

¶20

It is the case of the applicant that after availing the loan, the defendant was irregular in remitting the loan amount. The efforts of the applicant bank to make the defendant to settle the loan did not yield any result, and hence the applicant approached this Tribunal seeking issuance of a Recovery Certificate allowing recovery of the amount due in the account.

¶21

Summons were taken out to the defendant and the same was served. As there was no representation on behalf of the defendant on 08.07.2022 the defendant was set ex-parte on that day. Applicant Bank filed Proof Affidavit along with 10 documents, which were marked as Exhibits A-1 to A-10 on 10.02.2023. The Ld. Counsel for Applicant Bank made his submissions on 13.03.2023 and thereafter the matter stood till this date for passing final orders.

¶22

The following issues arise for consideration in the matter: -

¶23

(a) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the liability of the defendant?

¶24

(b) What order as to cost of the proceedings need be passed?

¶25

These issues are considered together.

¶26

¶27

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the applicant, perused the OA averments and the record placed before the Tribunal.

¶28

The evidence of the applicant is led by AW1 who produced the documents Exhibit A-1 to A-10 along with the proof affidavit. Exhibit A-1 is the Board Resolution of the applicant dated 17.10.2020. Exhibit A-2 is the Loan Application Form dated 18.07.2019 submitted by the defendant. Exhibit A-3 is the Loan Agreement dated 29.07.2019 executed by the defendant. Exhibit A-4 is the Customer SI Debit Authorisation Letter dated 29.07.2019 executed by the defendant. Exhibit A-5 is the Forex Un-hedged exposure letter dated 29.07.2019 executed by the defendant. Exhibit A-6 is the Legal notice dated 11.3.2021 issued by the defendant. Exhibit A-7 is the proof of service of the notice at first address of the defendant dated 13.03.2021. Exhibit A-8 is the returned cover of the legal notice sent to the defendant at the 2^nd address dated 13.03.2021. Exhibit A-9 is the returned cover of the legal notice dated 18.03.2021 at the third address of the defendant. Exhibit A-10 is the statement of accounts in respect of the loan account along with certificates under Bankers’ Book Evidence Act.

¶29

Exhibit A-1 evidences that the applicant bank had by its Resolution resolved to authorize the bank officers to represent and conduct the court proceedings in the name and on behalf of the applicant bank. Exhibit A-2 evidences that the defendant approached the applicant by its Loan Application dated 18.07.2019 for grant of Business Loan. Exhibit A-3 evidences that the applicant sanctioned Business Loan of Rs.20 lakhs subject to terms and conditions and the defendant executed the Loan Agreement on 29.07.2019. Exhibit A-4 and A-5 evidences

¶30

¶31

that the defendant had on 29.07.2019 loan documents in order to secure the loan facility availed. Exhibit A-6 to A-9 evidences that the defendant defaulted in repayment and hence the applicant issued the legal notice on 11.03.2021 calling upon the defendant to clear the outstanding dues and the said notice was served at one of the address and returned from the two other address. Exhibit A-10, the statement of accounts in respect of the loan account produced and certified under the Banker’s Book Evidence Act, clearly indicates that the amount claimed by the applicant is due from the defendant. It is clear from the statement of accounts that penal interest is not capitalized.

¶32

The proof affidavit of the applicant bank remained unchallenged and unrebutted. Therefore, on careful consideration of proof affidavit along with Exhibits filed on behalf of the applicant bank, besides the material placed before the Tribunal, the Tribunal is satisfied that the applicant bank has successfully proved the OA claim against the defendant. Point is answered accordingly.

¶33

In view of the foregoing, it is clear the above OA has been filed well within the period of limitation and this Tribunal has the pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction to take up the OA.

¶34

In view of the fact that the loan availed by the defendant is a Business Loan and the applicant has charged and claimed interest at contractual rate till the filing of the OA, this Tribunal is of the view that the pendent lite and future interest be awarded at the rate 14% per annum (simple)

¶35

¶36

In view of the afore mentioned discussions, the only conclusion this Tribunal can draw is that the applicant had clearly proved the disbursement of the loan, which the applicant is entitled to realize. Hence, OA is disposed off in the following manner: -

¶37

(a) TA No.193 of 2022 stands allowed.

¶38

(b) Applicant is permitted to realize a sum of Rs.22,25,775.95p with further interest at the rate of 14% per annum (simple) from the defendant from the date of filing of the OA till date of realization, after deducting all the amounts received by them during the pendency of OA, and also by selling the other assets of the defendant.

¶39

¶40

(d) Applicant is permitted to realize cost of the proceedings and shall file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

¶41

(e) The Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery Officer in terms of this final order.

¶42

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶43

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court on this the 22^nd day of May, 2023)

¶44

Sd/(T. RAJESH ) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, CHENNAI

¶45

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Ms. N. Seerisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Ms. N. Seerisha

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

Ms G R Preetheka versus City Union Bank Limited

Idbi Bank Ltd. versus Mr P Sambathkumar

Idbi Bank Ltd., versus a. Saranya

Indian Bank versus Ms. Vinodhini Priyanka

Ms Kalaiselvi Food Products Pvt. Ltd. versus Canara Bank

Punjab National Bank versus Mr. E. Venkatesh