Allowed

The Federal Bank Limited v. Sri Rakesh Sampath Shetty

DRT20 Jan 2024OA/124/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT allowed the Applicant Bank's original application for recovery of Rs.61,60,356.78/- (principal) and future interest @ 18.25% p.a. from the respondents, who failed to repay a housing loan despite issuing demand notices, as the respondents appeared exparte and offered no contrary evidence.

What did the court decide?

Recovery order for Rs.61,60,356.78/- plus interest @ 18.25% p.a. with liberty to sell mortgaged property and personal assets.

The Federal Bank Limited versus Sri Rakesh Sampath Shetty — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 20^th Day of January, 2024

¶3

Present: SMT. S. V. GOWRAMMA

¶4

Hon`ble Presiding Officer

¶5

OA. No.124/2023

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

The Federal Bank Limited Having its Registered office at Aluva, Kerala State Its Branch office at Basavanagudi, Bengaluru, Rep. by its Vice President & Principal Officer Sri. Solon George … APPLICANT

¶8

AND:

¶9

Mr. Rakesh Sampath Shetty S/o. Sampath A Shetty Aged about 45 years

¶10

Mrs. Prajna Rakesh W/o. Rakesh Sampath Shetty Aged about 42 years

¶11

Both are R/at. 008, 3 Dwellington, 2^nd Stage, Devinagar Main Road, Lottegollahalli, Bengaluru-560094 ... DEFENDANTS

¶12

Counsel on record/appeared for: Applicant : Mr. Nagaraj Damodar Defendants : Exparte

¶13

:FINAL ORDER:

¶14

The Original Application (OA) is filed on 31.10.2022 by Applicant Bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against the defendant to recover a sum of Rs.61,60,356.78/- with

¶15

2 OA. 124/2023

¶16

further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization from the defendants.

¶17

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE :

¶18

The Applicant submits that the application is filed within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 24 of the Recovery of Debt Due to Banks and Bankruptcy Act 1993, and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Tribunal.

¶19

The case of the Applicant Bank is that the Defendant No.1 is the principal borrower and Defendant No.2 is a co-applicant/co-obligant is a borrower and has approached the Applicant Bank House loan of Rs.49,72,072/- for purchase of house, after considering the application of the defendant the applicant bank sanctioned the same to the defendants.

¶20

The defendant No.1 and 2 jointly executed On demand, Security delivery letter, Federal housing scheme agreement and created equitable mortgage in favour of the applicant. The defendants agreed to repay the housing loan in 240 EMI of Rs.56,490/- with interest at the rate of 12.5% p.a. with monthly rests.

¶21

The defendant executed necessary loan documents in favour of the applicant bank as security for the due repayment of the loan, interest, cost and charges, and various loan documents in respect of loan in favour of the applicant bank.

¶22

The Applicant Bank submits that the Defendants, after

¶23

3 OA. 124/2023

¶24

availing the said facilities, failed to repay the loan amount and committed

¶25

default. The loan account was classified as NPA on 30.03.2021. The default in repayment continued and there was no positive response from the defendants. Hence, the applicant bank has issued demand notice dated 21.05.2021 and 28.06.2022. Hence, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the defendants.

¶26

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the Defendant through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due and the summons duly served on the defendants in the month of February 2023. When OA was taken up on 26.07.2023 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendant; hence, Defendants placed exparte on 26.07.2023.

¶27

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶28

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Sri. Shrikrishna

¶29

Sharma K, S/o. Sri. Gopalakrishna Bhat K, Associate Vice President , has

¶30

filed his Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW.1 and marked as Ex.A1, the list of Document came to be marked as Ex.A2 and documents came to be marked as Ex.A3 to A11. As the defendants remained ex-parte, the OA claim remains unchallenged. There is no contra evidence available on record to repudiate the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶31

Having regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied,

¶32

4 OA. 124/2023

¶33

the conduct and operations in the account and the default committed,

¶34

this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled to a final order on the following terms.

¶35

: O R D E R:

¶36

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶37

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from Defendants No.1 and 2 a sum of Rs.61,60,356.78/- (Rupees Sixty One Lakhs Sixty Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Six and Seventy Eight Paisa only) as on 19.10.2022 together with pendetellite and future interest @ 18.25% per annum with monthly rests from 19.10.2022 till realization.

¶38

(b) In the event of failure of the defendants to pay the

¶39

aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of the schedule mentioned property in the OA;

¶40

¶41

(d) If the sale proceeds of the schedule mentioned mortgaged/hypothecated properties are not sufficient to satisfy the dues as ordered above, the applicant bank is at liberty to sell the personal assets of the defendants (both movable and immovable) to recover the balance dues as required under law;

¶42

5 OA. 124/2023

¶43

(e) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of

¶44

OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the defendants duly considering the amounts, if any, paid by the defendants and/or amount realized by sale of assets etc., during the intervening period after the filing of the OA, enabling the Registry to prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by defendants to the applicant bank.

¶45

(f) The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the date of this final order.

¶46

(g) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

¶47

A copy of this order be communicated to the parties concerned.

¶48

[Dictated to the (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed by me on this the 20^th of January, of 2024]

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

¶51

ANNEXURES

¶52

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶53

AW-1: Sri. Shrikrishna Sharma K, Associate Vice President of the applicant bank.

¶54

6 OA. 124/2023

¶55

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶56

Exhibit Nos.	Particulars of Documents
A1	Applicant Evidence
A2	List of Documents.
A3	Loanapplicationdated22.05.2008
A4	On Demand note dated 30.08.2008
A5	Security Delivery letter dated 30.08.2008
A6	Federal housing scheme agreement dated 30.08.2008
A7	Memorandum and description of the property of security dated 31.10.2008
A8	Notice dated 28.06.2022 and postal receipts
A9	Statement of account extract
A10	Certificate U/s 2A (B) & (c) of the Banker’s Book Evidence Act

¶57

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶58

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶59

:Schedule Property: Security in respect of loan A/c.No.13187300005899 of Defendant No.1

¶60

All that piece and parcel of the property bearing site No.7, BMP No.112/B, PID No.96-242-112/B, measuring East to West: 60’ (Sixty feet) and North to South 19’ (Ninteen feet), in all 1140 square feet with building with Ground Floor and First Floor, Second Floor having plinth area of 674 square feet each situated at Hebbal Gramatana, Ward No.96, of Hebbal Village, Kasaba Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk and bounded on:

¶61

East : Road West : Drainage North : Property No.6 South : Remaining portion of same property belongs to M. Venkatappa

¶62

Sd/PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

The Federal Bank Limited v. Sri Rakesh Sampath Shetty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Federal Bank Limited v. Sri Rakesh Sampath Shetty

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Plancraft

Canara Bank versus Sri Pulin Saikia

Canara Bank versus M/s M.D.S. Infra Nirman Private Limited and Others

Punjab National Bank versus Vinod Kumar

Canara Bank versus Mrs. Sarita Singh

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Alliance Tradevision Pvt. Ltd.