Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Prime Infotech

DRT4 Jan 2024MA/186/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the Bank of Baroda's application for condonation of a 212-day delay in re-presenting its Original Application. The court directed that interest for the period of delay shall be considered at the time of issuing the Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of 212-day delay allowed on condition that interest for the delay period be levied at the time of issuing the Recovery Certificate.

Bank of Baroda versus Prime Infotech — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

MA No.186/23 in OASR No.1428/23

¶2

04.01.2024

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL – III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 04^th day of January, 2024

¶6

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

¶7

MA No.186/23 in OASR No.1428/2023

¶8

(Edrt -Dy. No.214/2023)

¶9

Bank of Baroda Kodambakkam Branch Rep. by its Branch Manager No.10, First Main Street United India Colony, Chennai – 600 024

¶10

....Petitioner

¶11

-Vs-

¶12

M/s Prince Infotech Rep. by its Proprietor Ms. Sandhya 26/18, VOC 1^st Main Road Vigneshwarar Koil 3^rd Street Kodambakkam Chennai – 600 024

¶13

Ms. Sandhya D/o Mr. Mohanan No.50/10, Ayyavu Street Shenoy Nagar Chennai – 600 030 ….Respondents

¶14

Counsel for Petitioner bank : M/s J. Ramanathan

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

MA No.186/23 in OASR No.1428/23

¶19

¶20

04.01.2024

¶21

It is the case of the petitioner / applicant bank that the objections with regard to capitalization of penal interest was duly contemplated to be complied upon and copy of OA was handed over to the then Manager for preparing the calculation, however due to annual transfers, the then Manager was transferred, due to which the calculations as sought for could not be obtained from applicant bank and re-presented within the time granted by this Tribunal. Hence, there was delay in processing the returns and the OA was re-presented with a delay of 212 days and petitioner bank prayed for condonation of the same.

¶22

On perusal of records, it is seen that this is an OA filed for recovery of a total sum of Rs.35,63,436.46p due in respect of Overdraft facility together with future interest at the rate of 13.90% 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.

¶23

However, in the circumstances, this MA is allowed on the condition that the subject of levy of interest for the defaulted period (212 days), which is condoned at this stage of the OA proceedings, shall stand for consideration at the time of issuance of

¶24

MA No.186/23 in OASR No.1428/23

¶25

¶26

04.01.2024

¶27

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 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

¶28

the Tribunal.

¶29

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

¶30

(Dictated to PS, transcribed by her, corrected, corrected, signed and processed through E-drt on this the 04^th day of January, 2024)

¶31

Sd/- (GANAPATHI K.R.K) 0 PRESIDING OFFICER

Bank of Baroda v. Prime Infotech

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Prime Infotech

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

City Union Bank Limited versus M/S Janata Timber and Saw Mill

Venkatesan Gangadharan versus Union Bank of India

Mrs S Punitha versus Indian Bank

Yesu Gurusamy versus Hdfc Bank

Bank of Baroda versus Rm Enterprises

Sampath Kumar versus Indian Overseas Bank