Allowed

Idbi Bank v. Rengasamy R

DRT29 Dec 2023TA/916/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the Transfer Application filed by IDBI Bank Ltd. to recover dues from two respondents. The court upheld the bank's claim of outstanding dues based on uncontroverted documentary evidence in the defendants were defaulting on a credit facility secured by warehouse receipts.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 53,93,910/- with interest at 9.90% p.a.; issuance of Recovery Certificate; realization of costs.

Idbi Bank versus Rengasamy R — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI Dated this 29^th day of December, 2023

¶2

PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

TA.No.916 OF 2023 (Old OA.No.391/2019 - DRT-I, Chennai)

¶4

M/s IDBI Bank Ltd., Rep. by its Manager, Mr.V.Mahesh Kumar, Neelamangalam Branch, AKT Memorial School, Kallakurichi Chennai Main Road, Neelamangalam (PO), Kallakurichi (TK), Villupuram – 606 202.

¶5

… Applicant.

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Mr.R.Rengasamy, S/o.Mr.Ramajayam, No.4/439, Kattukottai, Navakurichi Post,

¶8

Attur Taluk,

¶9

Salem 636 112.

¶10

M/s.Star Agriwarehousing and Collateral Management Limited, No.G-102, P.No.29, Molshree Residency, Mission Compound, Ajmer Road, Jaipur-302 006. RAJASTHAN.

¶11

¶12

Also at

¶13

M/s.Star Agriware housing and Collateral Management Limited, 3^rd Floor, Wing B, National Stock Exchange Building, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400 051. … Defendants.

¶14

Counsel for Applicant : Mr.S.Parthasarathy. Defendants : Exparte.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The above Transfer Application is filed under section 19 of the Recovery

¶17

of Debt and Bankruptcy Act seeking recovery of Rs.53,93,910/- with further interest from the date of filing of the TA and also by allowing the same to be recovered from the sale of schedule mentioned movable asset.

¶18

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

¶19

The case of the applicant can be encapsulated as follows:

¶20

The 1^st defendant approached the applicant and availed a credit facility for Rs.50,00,000/- against delivery cum deposit of commodities

¶21

(Paddy). It is specifically contented that the Applicant sanctioned the

¶22

¶23

finance against warehouse receipt to the time of Rs.50,00,000/- for the

¶24

purpose to offer liquidity support to farmers for avoiding distress.

¶25

It is also stated that the above facility was availed after execution of necessary loan documents by defendants obliging themselves to repay the amount promptly and regularly, without fail. A Master agreement for service with 2^nd defendant was entered by the Applicant to act as service to indemnify the Applicant for any loss incurred by the Bank due to misrepresentation of fact in respect of quantity and quality.

¶26

Apart from execution of the necessary loan documents, lien over paddy bags was marked as being the security for repayment of the loan.

¶27

It is also stated that the 1^st defendant had stolen the commodities from the godown and also failed to make the remittance, resulting defaults in the account and the same being declared as NPA on 31.03.2018.

¶28

The applicant’s officials had on many occasions approached the defendants requesting them to pay back the amount and despite the same, no effort was made by the defendants to get the account closed. Even as no repayment was made despite repeated requests, the applicant had on 14.03.2018 caused to issue a recall notice requiring repayment of the amount due in the account.

¶29

¶30

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

¶31

Even as the 1^st defendant failed to enter appearance, 1^st defendant was set exparte on 13.09.2019. Though the 2^nd defendant entered appearance no reply statement was filed and 2^nd defendant was set exparte on 10.10.2023.

¶32

The applicant had let in evidence through AW1 who had sworn to a Proof Affidavit in terms of the pleadings in the TA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A20 and got the same marked as evidence.

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶36

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶37

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendants remain exparte. The evidence tendered by

¶38

¶39

the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences

¶40

put forth by the applicant were found admissible. From the statement of accounts as produced by the applicant, it is evident that the amount as claimed in the TA is outstanding in the account, which the applicant is entitled to get recovered from the defendants and their assets. The claim of the applicant is well within the period of limitation and there is no Capitalization of penal interest.

¶41

In view of the finding as entered above

¶42

i) TA No.916/2023 stands allowed.

¶43

ii) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.53,93,910/-(Rupees Fifty Three Lakhs Ninety Three Thousands Nine Hundred and Ten only) with future and pendentelite interest @9.90% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendants after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the TA and by sale of schedule mentioned movable assets.

¶44

iii) A Recovery Certificate is to be drawn and issued to the recovery officer to enable recovery of the amount as per the above terms.

¶45

¶46

iv) 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.

¶47

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

¶48

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

¶49

(Dictated to PA, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 29^th day of December, 2023)

¶50

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

¶51

Idbi Bank v. Rengasamy R

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank v. Rengasamy R

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 Overseas Bank versus R.Ramesh

M/s Canara Bank Erstwhile M/s Syndicate Bank versus T.R. Saravanan

Deutsche Bank Ag versus Kothari Bath Concepts

State Bank of India versus Venkatasamy

Bank of Baroda, versus Mrs. R. Subbulakshmi

State Bank of India versus Mrs.a.Kumari