Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. . M/s. Sri Surya Agencies

DRT30 Nov 2023TA/851/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai allowed a transfer application filed by Bank of Baroda against M/s. Sri Surya Agencies and others. The court found the defendants in default on a trade loan which was declared NPA. Since the defendants appeared in ex parte proceedings, the court enforced recovery of the outstanding principal and interest, authorized the sale of schedule properties, and direct

What did the court decide?

Transfer Application allowed; recovery of Rs. 64,91,477/- with interest at 12%; sale of schedule property permitted; Recovery Certificate issued.

Bank of Baroda versus . M/s. Sri Surya Agencies — Specific Performance | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 30^th day of November, 2023

¶3

PRESENT : SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

TA.No.851 OF 2023

¶5

(Old OA No.47/2019-DRT-I, Chennai)

¶6

Bank of Baroda, Rep. by its Manager, Ramanaickenpet, Via Ambalur, Vaniyambadi Tk. Pin-635 801.

¶7

… APPLICANT.

¶8

(As permitted by Hon’ble Tribunal vide its order dt.11.07.2019 in IA 658/2019.)

¶9

Vs.

¶10

M/s. Sri Surya Agencies, Rep.by its Prop.P.S.Suresh Kumar, N.96, M C Road, Ambur-635802.

¶11

Mr. P.S.Suresh Kumar, S/o. P.Sivakumar, 29/2, 2^nd West Cross Street, CNA Road, Pudur, Vaniyambadi-635751.

¶12

Mrs. V.Varalakshmi, W/o. P.S.Suresh Kumar, 29/2, 2^nd West Cross Street, CNA Road, Pudur, Vaniyambadi-635751. …DEFENDANTS Counsel for Applicant : M/s.S.Pandurangan. Defendants : Exparte.

¶13

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The above Transfer Application is filed under section 19 of the Recovery of Debt and Bankruptcy Act seeking recovery of Rs.64,91,477/- with further interest from the date of filing of the TA and also by allowing the same to be recovered from the defendants jointly and severally and by sale of scheduled properties.

¶16

The above original application is filed before the DRT-I and stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as above.

¶17

The case of the applicant can be encapsulated as follows:-

¶18

The 1^st defendant represented by the 2^nd defendant being the borrower and 3^rd defendant the wife of 2^nd defendant being the guarantor/mortgagor had applied for Trade Loan for Rs. 5,00,000/from the applicants erst while Vijaya Bank.

¶19

It is also stated that the above facilities were availed after execution of necessary loan documents by defendants obliging themselves to repay the amount promptly and regularly without fail.

¶20

Apart from execution of the necessary loan documents, the 2^nd defendant had created security by way of equitable mortgage over the schedule mentioned property.

¶21

Even though the defendants had obliged themselves to repay the amount promptly and regularly, they failed to do so resulting defaults

¶22

¶23

in the account and the same being declared as NPA on 31.08.2009. It

¶24

is also stated that the defendants had executed various acknowledgment as provided u/s 18 of the Limitation Act and 25(3) of the Contract Act.

¶25

The applicant’s officials had on many occasions approached the defendants requesting them to repay the account and despite the same, no effort was made by the defendants to get the account regularized over to pay back the amount. Even as no repayment was made despite repeated request, the applicant had on 08.06.2017 caused to issue a notice requiring repayment of the amount due in the account.

¶26

It is also the case of the applicant that despite repeated reminders and requests, the defendants had failed to make the balance due forcing the applicant to file this OA seeking recovery of the amount due in the account with further interest and cost.

¶27

Even as the defendants failed to enter appearance, they were set exparte on 08.05.2019.After the amalgamation of Vijaya Bank with Bank of Baroda, the later got substituted in place of the applicant.

¶28

The applicant had let in evidence through AW1 who had sworn to a Proof Affidavit in terms of the pleadings in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A22 and got the same marked.

¶29

¶30

Heard the counsel for the applicant and considered the contention as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and proof affidavit. The following issues arise for consideration in this matter.

¶31

i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim?

¶32

ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶33

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remain exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found admissible. However as the defendant had not disputed the evidence the same is held as proved. From the statement of accounts as produced by the applicant, it is evident that the amount as claimed in the OA is outstanding in the account, which the applicant is entitled to get recovered from the defendants and their assets (including the schedule mentioned property). The claim of the applicant is well within the period of limitation and there is no Capitalization of penal interest. Since the interest claimed is on the higher side and OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at that rate pendentelite and future interest is awarded at 12% (simple).

¶35

¶36

13. In view of the finding as entered above

¶37

i) TA. No.851 OF 2023 stands allowed. ii) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs. 64,91,477/- (Rupees Sixty Four Lakhs Ninety One Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Seven only) with future and pendentelite interest @12% from the date of filing of the TA till realization after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the TA.

¶38

iii) The schedule property to be proceeded against and sold and if the sale proceeds are not sufficient the defendants and their other assets are liable to be proceeded against. iv) A Recovery Certificate is to be drawn and issued to the recovery officer to enable recovery of the as per the above terms.

¶39

v) Applicant is allowed to realize cost of the proceedings for which cost memo is to be filed in 7 days’ time from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

¶40

¶41

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of

¶42

Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶43

( Dictated to PA, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 30^th day of November, 2023 )

¶44

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

¶45

Bank of Baroda v. . M/s. Sri Surya Agencies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. . M/s. Sri Surya Agencies

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

Indian Bank versus M/s. Royal Agro and Diary Limited

M/s. Idbi Bank Ltd. versus M/s V.S Enterprises

Thangamani oil Stores versus Indian Overseas Bank

State Bank of India, versus R.M.Ezhilarasu

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus Mr.S.Rengaraj

Idbi Bank versus Ramajayam R