Allowed

Canara Bank v. R Jayaramaiah

DRT19 Apr 2024OA/1444/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank's recovery application against three defendants who defaulted on a farm machinery loan. The defendants responded ex-parte, leaving the claim unchallenged. The Tribunal ordered recovery of the principal sum along with interest and costs.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 27,68,377 with interest at 12.50% p.a. compounded monthly plus 2% overdue interest from 01.07.2022, realizable through sale of schedule properties and personal assets.

Canara Bank versus R Jayaramaiah — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

Dated this 19^th day of April 2024

¶3

Present: SMT. S. V. GOWRAMMA Hon’ble Presiding Officer

OA NO.1444/2022

BETWEEN:

Canara Bank

Sira, Sira Taluk - 572137, Tumakuru District. Represented by its Chief Manager, Sri. Daya Nath Rao.

¶8

…APPLICANT

¶9

AND:

¶10

Sri. R. Jayaramaiah,

¶11

S/o Ranganna,

¶12

Aged about 57 years.

¶13

Sri. M.J.Gururaj S/o R. Jayaramaiah,

¶14

Aged about 33 years.

¶15

Miss. M.J. Chaitra D/o R. Jayaramaiah,

¶16

Aged about 29 years,

¶17

All are residing at,

¶18

Manganahalli Village, Shagadadu Post, Sira Taluk, Tumakuru District. …DEFENDANTS

¶19

Counsel on record/appeared for:

¶20

Applicant : Sri.Mohamed Afroze Ahmed

¶21

Defendant Nos.1 to 3 : Ex-parte.

¶22

FINAL ORDER

¶23

The present Original Application (OA) is filed on 26-08-2022, under section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993 for recovery of a sum of Rs.27,68,377/-(Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs Sixty Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy Seven Only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing till realization from defendants.

¶24

The Application filed is within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 24 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act 1993 and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal.

¶25

Brief facts of the case:

¶26

The Applicant bank submits that, the 1st Defendant availed a Farm Machinery Loan amount of Rs.4,60,000.00 for the purpose of purchase of Tractor and Trailer on 09.03.2007, agreeing to repay the same in 14 half yearly Installment of Rs.32,860.00, along with interest at the rate of 12.50% p.a plus overdue interest at 2%. And the same is registered before the RTO, Tumakuru, Vide bearing Regn.No.KA-06-TA-5029 and 5030. The 2nd and 3rd Defendants are the signatories to the Mortgage deed, Hence made party to the Suit. And all the Defendants have executed all the Loan Documents in favour of the Applicants Bank.

¶27

The 1st Defendant submitted a Loan Application for Farm Machinery

¶28

Loan to the Applicant Bank on 09.03.2007. Memorandum of Agreement for Agricultural Loans dated 09.03.2007, Certificate of Loan Papers Obtained executed by the Defendant dated 09.03.2007. The Form of Certificate of Registration issued by R.T.O., Tumakuru vide bearing Regn.No.KA-06-TA5029 and 5030 dated 11.04.2007. The Applicant bank submits that, all the Defendants have mortgaged dated 07.03.2007, in favour of Applicant bank.

¶29

The Quotation issued by Vijaya Farm Equipments, dated 08.01.2007.

¶30

Letter of Revival executed by the defendant on 28.12.2009, 20.12.2012, 02.02.2015, 20.12.2017, 01.12.2020. As the defendant has failed to adhere the terms and conditions of the loan, the applicant has classified all

¶31

the loan account of the defendant as a Non- Performing Asset on 29.03.2021. The Applicant is entitled to recover the accrued interest from 01.07.2022 towards Loan, upto date of full realization by the applicant. The Applicant Bank submits that the Defendants, after availing the loans, failed

¶32

to repay the loan amount and committed default. However, there was no positive response from the defendants. Hence, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the defendants.

¶33

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the Defendants

¶34

No.1 to 3 by RPAD, on 13.09.2023 duly served, Acknowledgment

¶35

produced. When OA was taken up on 15.11.2023, even after giving

¶36

sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants, hence, Defendants No.1 to 3 was placed ex-parte on 15.11.2023.

¶37

Heard the submissions of Counsels and perused the records.

¶38

To prove the case, Sri.Daya Nath Rao, S/o. Bhagirathi Ram, aged about 51 years, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank, has filed Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW.1 and marked

¶39

as Ex.A1, and documents came to be marked as Ex.A3 to A16. As the defendants remained ex-parte, the OA claim remains unchallenged. There

¶40

is no contra evidence available on record to repudiate the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶41

Having regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied, documents executed, the conduct and operations in the loan account and the default committed, this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled to a final order on the following terms:-

¶42

: O R D E R:

¶43

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶44

(a) The Applicant bank is allowed to recover from defendant Nos.1 to 3 jointly or severally, a sum of Rs.27,68,377.00 (Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs Sixty Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy Seven only) with current and future interest at 12.50% p.a. compounded monthly plus over due interest at 2% from 01.07.2022, From the date of Application till the date realization.

¶45

(b) In the event of failure of the defendants to pay the aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of the schedule mentioned properties in the OA;

¶46

¶47

d) If the sale proceeds of the schedule mentioned 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 movables and immovables) to recover the balance dues as required under law;

¶48

(e) The Applicant Bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of OA

¶49

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.

¶50

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

¶51

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

¶52

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

¶53

[Dictated to the (GS), transcribed by him, corrected and signed by me on this the 19^th day April 2024].

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

¶56

ANNEXURES

¶57

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK:

¶58

AW-1: Sri. Sathya Madhav.T, Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank.

¶59

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶60

Sl. No	Date	PARTICULARS	EXHIBITS
1.	09.03.2007	Loan Application	A3
2.	09.03.2007	Sanction Letter	A4
3.	09.03.2007	Memorandum of Agreement for Agricultural Loan	A5
4.	09.03.2007	NF-482/2L, Certificate of Loan Papers Obtained.	A6
5.	11.04.2007	Form of Certificate of Registration issued by R.T.O.,	A7
6.		Copy of B-Register Extract	A8
7.	07.03.2007	Registered Mortgage Deed	A9
8.	08.01.2007	Copy of the Quotation issued by Vijaya Farm Equipments.	A10
9.	28.12.2009	Letter of Revival	A11
10.	20.12.2012	Letter of Revival	A12
11.	02.02.2015	Letter of Revival	A13
12.	20.12.2017	Letter of Revival	A14
13.	01.12.2020	Letter of Revival	A15
14.		Statement of Account in A/No.0587856007730.	A16

¶61

Witness Examined for the Defendants:

¶62

-Nil –

¶63

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶64

SCHEDULE OF THE PROPERTY

¶65

All that piece and parcel of the Land bearing Sy.No.24 extent 16.00 acres out of which 1.09 acres, Situated at Doddaaladamadu of Bukkapatna Hobli,Sira Taluk, and bounded by:

¶66

East by: Land of Badanaika,

¶67

West by: Land of Balaiah,

¶68

North by: Land of Ranganathappa,

¶69

South by: Lands of Sharadamma.

¶70

All that piece and parcel of the Land bearing Sy.No.27, extent 8.29 acres out of which 2.20 acres, Situated at Doddaaladamadu of Bukkapatna Hobli and bounded by:

¶71

East by: Land of Dakranaika,

¶72

West by: Land of Srinivasappa,

¶73

North by: Land of Ajjanaika,

¶74

South by: Lands of Badanaika.

¶75

All that piece and parcel of the Land bearing Sy.No.50/2, extent 1.34 acres out of which 1.03 acres Situated at Manganahalli Village, and bounded by:

¶76

East by: Land of Rangaiah,

¶77

West by: Land of Balaiah, North by: Land of Siddappa, South by: Lands of Thakranaika.

¶78

All that piece and parcel of the Land bearing Sy.No.30/3, totally measuring 7.02 assessed at 2.26 out of which 3.22 acres Situated at Doddaladamadu, Bukkapatna Hobli, Sira Taluk and bounded by:

¶79

East by: Land of Ramachandrappa, West by: Land of Government land,

¶80

North by: Land of Siddappa,

¶81

South by: Lands of Thakranaika.

¶82

Sd/PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, BENGALURU

Canara Bank v. R Jayaramaiah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. R Jayaramaiah

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

Md Hadikul Islam versus Punjab National Bank (United Bank of India)

State Bank of India versus M/S Ramrao Ginning Factory through Its Proprietor Shri Pavan S/O. Vijay Chavan

Axis Bank versus M P Girish

State Bank of India versus Chiragoni Shankaraiah

Union Bank of India (Erstwhile Andhra Bank) versus M/S Bramha Teja Paper Products

Indian Bank versus Veersham