Allowed

State Bank of India v. Cm Atheequr Rahman Co.

DRT26 Mar 2024OA/134/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an originating application filed by a bank for recovery of a defaulted loan amount. The default clause of a settlement entered between parties was found operative, permitting recovery of the principal, interest, and costs against the defendants and their assets.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.4,15,47,687/- with interest at 17.20% p.a. from 31.10.2022, along with costs, via sale of scheduled properties and other assets.

State Bank of India versus Cm Atheequr Rahman Co. — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL – II AT CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 26^th day of March, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SHRI T. RAJESH

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

OA No.134/2023

¶6

State Bank of India, SME Walajapet Branch, 1^st Floor, Palar Towers, MBT Road, Walajapet – 632 513. Vellore District. Rep. by its Chief Manager.

¶7

… Applicant.

¶8

Vs.

¶9

M/s.C.M.Atheequr Rahman & Co.,

¶10

Rep. by Partners.

¶11

Sri C.M.Atheequr Rahman.

¶12

Smt.K.Rubeen Johanara Begum.

¶13

Smt.C.M.Rumana Kulsum.

¶14

No.29/15, V.V.Koil Street,

¶15

Periamet,

¶16

Chennai – 600 003.

¶17

Sri C.M.Atheequr Rahman, S/o.Shri C.M.Mubarak Ali.

¶18

Smt.K.Rubeen Johanara Begum, D/o.Mr.K.Rusheed Ahmed.

¶19

Smt.C.M.Rumana Kulsum, D/o.Mr.C.M.Mubarak Ali.

¶20

Sri C.M.Mubarak Ali, S/o.Late C.M.Bashher Ahmed.

¶21

2 to 5 are residing at No.16/77, Charminar Street, Pernambut, Gudiyattam Taluk, Vellore District.

¶22

… Defendants.

¶23

¶24

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.Suresh Law Associates. Defendants : ………

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

The present OA is filed by applicant bank for recovery of a sum of Rs.4,15,47,687/- together with interest thereon at the rate of 17.20% p.a. with monthly rests from the date of OA till the date of realisation together with costs from the defendants jointly and severally and by sale of schedule mentioned properties and hypotheca.

¶27

During the pendency of the OA, the applicant has filed a joint compromise memo vide Sr.No.9495 dt.08.11.2023. It is seen from the memo that the joint compromise as entered between the parties on 14.08.2023, the default clause is incorporated stating that on failure on the part of the defendants making repayment as agreed in the joint compromise, the defendants shall be liable to pay Rs.4,15,47,687/- due as on 31.10.2022 with further interest at contractual rates from the date of application till the realization. It is admitted case of both parties that the settlement could not be complied in full by the defendants, making the default clause operative against them.

¶28

In the result,

¶29

i) OA No.134 of 2023 stands allowed

¶30

ii) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.4,15,47,687/- (Rupees Four Crores Fifteen Lakhs Forty

¶31

¶32

Seven Thousands Six Hundred and Eighty Seven only) with further interest @17.20% p.a. from 31.10.2022 till realization from the defendants and their assets after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and also by proceeding against schedule mentioned properties.

¶33

iii) The schedule property to be proceeded against and sold and if the sale proceeds are not sufficient the defendants and their other assets are liable to be proceeded against.

¶34

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

¶35

v) Applicant is allowed to realize cost of the proceeding for which cost memo is to be filed in 7 days’ time from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

¶36

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶37

(Dictated to PA, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 26^th day of March, 2024)

¶38

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

State Bank of India v. Cm Atheequr Rahman Co.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Cm Atheequr Rahman Co.

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

Bamk of Baroda versus S. Indira

Indian Overseas Bank versus Muthukumar

Bank of Baroda versus . G. Rajesh

State Bank of India versus P. Kaviyarasan

Indian Bank versus M/s. Balaji Enterprises

Idbi Bank Limited versus Mr. D. Santhoshkumar