Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Padma Shekar

DRT5 Feb 2024MA/174/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for condonation of a 277-day delay in re-presenting the Original Application. The court directed that the claim for interest for the defaulted period be considered later at the time of issuing the Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

MA allowed on condition that levy of interest for the 277-day defaulted period be considered at the time of issuance of the Recovery Certificate.

Bank of Baroda versus Padma Shekar — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

MA No.174/23 in OASR No.10923/22

¶2

05.02.2024

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL – III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 05^th day of February, 2024

¶6

Present: Shri Ganapathi K.R.K. Presiding Officer

¶7

MA No.174/23 in OASR No.10923/2022 (Edrt -Dy. No.1057/2022)

¶8

Bank of Baroda (Erstwhile Vijaya Bank) Rep. by its Chief Manager No.25, 3^rd Avenue Indira Nagar, Chennai – 600 020 ....Petitioner

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

Mrs. Padma Shekar W/o Veera Shekar No.5, 3^rd Main Road Indira Nagar, Adyar Chennai – 600 020

¶11

Mr. Veera Shekar S/o Muthuraman No.5, 3^rd Main Road Indira Nagar, Adyar Chennai – 600 020

¶12

Mr. M. Vinayagharaj S/o Muthuraman No.1, Land Marvel Apartments II Floor, 1^st Street Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai – 600 041 ….Respondents

¶13

Counsel for Petitioner bank : M/s R. Sreedhar

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

This MA is filed by the Petitioner / Applicant Bank for condonation of delay of

¶16

277 days in re-presenting the Original Application after complying with the office objections.

¶17

MA No.174/23 in OASR No.10923/22

¶18

¶19

05.02.2024

¶20

It is the case of the petitioner / applicant bank that the objections were duly contemplated to be complied upon, however due to frequent transfers at the Branch level as well as due to administrative reasons, applicant bank could not comply with the same within the time granted by this Tribunal, which was neither willful nor wanton. Hence, there was delay in processing the returns and the OA was re-presented with a delay of 277 days and petitioner bank prayed for condonation of the same.

¶21

On perusal of records, it is seen that this is an OA filed for recovery of a total sum of Rs.2,56,37,906.57p due in respect of Mortgage Loan facility together with future interest at the rate of 11.90% p.a. with monthly rests from defendants. It is not explained anywhere in the petition as to how applicant bank will be entitled to claim interest at the contractual rate for the period of delay, which is owing to their inaction and not attributable to any action of the defendants. As the period of delay is on the high side, condonation of the same by levying formal amount in the form of costs payable either to the Library Fund or to any Charity organization as a measure of reprimand would not be justifiable when compared with the levy of interest burden on the defendants for the period of default on the part of the applicant bank for no fault of the borrower.

¶22

However, in the circumstances, this MA is allowed on the condition that the subject of levy of interest for the defaulted period (277 days), which is condoned at this stage of the OA proceedings, shall stand for consideration at the time of issuance of Recovery Certificate by the progress of the case and the conduct of the case on behalf of the applicant bank till the stage of issuance of the recovery certificate. Registry is

¶23

MA No.174/23 in OASR No.10923/22

¶24

¶25

05.02.2024

¶26

directed to put up a note accordingly for consideration of claim of interest for this default period at the time of drawing of the Recovery Certificate in case for an order thereto by

¶27

the Tribunal.

¶28

Registry is directed to number the OA, if otherwise found to be in order.

¶29

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, corrected, signed and processed through E-drt on this the 05^th day of February, 2024)

¶30

Sd/- (GANAPATHI K.R.K) PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Baroda v. Padma Shekar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Padma Shekar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil K varghese versus Indian Overseas Bank

M s Thiru Travel Service versus M s Omkara Assets Reconstruction Company Limited

K Jaganathan versus Indian Bank

Marg Ltd. versus Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd.

Union Bank of India versus Soundaranayaki

Jayanthi versus Pridhvi Asset Reconstruction And Securitisation Company Ltd.