Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Anjugam K

DRT30 Nov 2023TA/945/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Transfer Application under Section 19 of the RDB Act, the court enforced a Term Loan agreement where the borrower defaulted. As the defendant appeared ex parte, the court found the claim established and awarded recovery of the outstanding principal along with future interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 28,76,573/- with future interest at 10% p.a.; issuance of Recovery Certificate; permission to realize costs.

Punjab National Bank versus Anjugam K — 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.945 OF 2023

¶5

(Old OA.No.276/2020–DRT-I, Chennai)

¶6

Punjab National Bank, Nungambakkam Branch, No.9, Nugambakkam High Road, Chennai-600034. Rep. by its Chief Manager.

¶7

… APPLICANT.

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Mrs. K.Anjugam, W/o. Kumaravel, N.4A, Kannagi Street, Nehru Nagar, Velachery, Chennai-600042.

¶10

Also At Plot No.9, Door N.18, Koladi Main Road, Paruthipattu, Thiruverkadu, Chennai-600071. … DEFENDANTS. Counsel for Applicant : Mr.S.Vaidyanathan. Defendant : Exparte. ……

¶11

ORDER

¶12

The above Transfer Application is filed under section 19 of the

¶13

Recovery of Debt and Bankruptcy Act seeking recovery of Rs. 28,76,573/- with further interest from the date of filing of the TA from

¶14

¶15

the defendant and also by allowing the same to be recovered from his assets.

¶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 defendant being the borrower and had applied for and availed a Term Loan for Rs.40,00,000/- for the purchase of 7 Indigo eSC LS cars. It was agreed that the amount would be repaid in 58 monthly instalments of Rs.92,800/- Later the same was rephased to 53 EMIs of Rs.97824.83 each payable from March 2016 instead by October 2015.

¶19

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

¶20

Apart from execution of the necessary loan documents, hypothecation over the vehicles was marked as being the security for repayment of the loan.

¶21

Even though the defendant had obliged herself to repay the amount promptly and regularly, she failed to do so resulting defaults in the account and the same being declared as NPA on 11.01.2018.

¶22

The applicant’s officials had on many occasions approached the defendant requesting her to repay the account and despite the same, no

¶23

¶24

effort was made by the defendant to get the account regularized over to pay back the amount. Even as no repayment was made despite demand, the vehicles were repossessed and sold. The amount of Rs.23,86,118/- received by such sale is adjusted to the loan account.

¶25

It is also the case of the applicant that despite repeated reminders and requests, the defendant 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.

¶26

Even as the defendant failed to enter appearance, shewas set exparte on 18.05.2022.

¶27

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 A8 and got the same marked.

¶28

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.

¶29

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

¶30

ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶31

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

¶32

¶33

The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant remains exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences 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 OA is outstanding in the account, which the applicant is entitled to get recovered from the defendant and her assets. The claim of the applicant is well within the period of limitation and there is no Capitalization of penal interest. The loan being a vehicle loan in which the vehicle was repossessed and sold, pendentelite and future interest is awarded at 10% (simple).

¶34

In view of the finding as entered above

¶35

i) TA.No.945 OF 2023 stands allowed.

¶36

ii) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs. 28,76,573/- (Rupees Twenty Eight Lakhs Seventy Six Thousand Five Hundred Seventy Three only) with future and pendentelite interest @ 10% p.a. (simple) 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.

¶37

¶38

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.

¶39

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.

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

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

¶44

Punjab National Bank v. Anjugam K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Anjugam K

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