Allowed

M/s. Canara Bank v. M/s.612 International Clothing & Co.

DRT13 Feb 2024OA/46/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this debt recovery proceeding, the Tribunal allowed the bank's application for a recovery certificate. Finding the claim un-rebutted and within limitation, the court directed personal recovery of Rs. 20,37,337/- with 8% simple interest and sale of hypothecated assets.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of a Recovery Certificate for Rs. 20,37,337/- plus 8% per annum simple interest, permitting realization through personal recovery and sale of assets.

M/s. Canara Bank versus M/s.612 International Clothing & Co. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 13^th day of February, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

O.A.No.46 of 2023

¶5

M/s. Canara Bank, Rep. by its Branch Manager, Mrs.B.Sai Kamadeshwari, Chinmaya Nagar Branch, 33/13, Kaliamman Koil Street, Sai Nagar Annexe, Chinmaya Nagar, Chennai – 600 092.

¶6

… Applicant.

¶7

Vs.

¶8

M/s.612 International Clothing & Co., Represented by its Proprietrix, Mrs.P.Uma Shankari, B-7/280, Pondiyan Nagar, Nanmangalam, Kovilambakkam, Chennai – 600 129.

¶9

Mrs.Uma Shankari, No.1, Bhattacharjee Street, G-2, Salims Paragon Square, Virugambakkam, Chennai – 600 092. … Defendants. Counsel for Applicant : Mr.S.Parthasarathy. Defendants : Exparte.

¶10

ORDER

¶11

The Application is filed Under Section 19 (1) of the Recovery of Debts

¶12

And Bankruptcy Act, 1993 seeking for issuance of a Recovery

¶13

¶14

Certificate for total sum of Rs.20,37,337/- due in various credit facilities availed by the defendants.

¶15

The Applicant contends that OCC/ODBD of Rs.10,00,000/-, Term Loan of Rs.4,90,000/-, Funded Interest Term Loan of Rs.76,000/- and COVID Funded Interest Term Loan of Rs.45,692/- were availed by 1^st defendant; a proprietary concern wherein 2^nd defendant is the proprietrix. It is also stated that the facilities were secured by hypothecation movable properties described in the schedule to the OA.

¶16

The Applicant further contends that despite availing the credit facilities by obliging to pay back the amount, the defendants failed in compliance of the same and all the efforts of the Applicant to make the defendants pay back the amount failed forcing the Applicant to file this Application.

¶17

Summons was taken out and as the defendants failed to appear they were set exparte on 19.06.2023.

¶18

The Applicant let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in confirmation with the pleadings and got marked Exhs.A1 to A14.

¶19

Heard. The following issues arise for consideration:

¶20

i) Whether the Applicant had proved the OA claim?

¶21

ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶22

¶23

Both these issues are decided together.

¶24

The Applicant’s evidences remain un-rebutted and hence proved. The documents produced by the Applicant are found to be admissible and are sufficient to prove the OA claim. Hence the Applicant is found to be entitled for the OA claim. The OA claim is made within limitation and there is no capitalization of penal interest. Since the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at agreed rate which is on the higher side, pendentelite and future interest is awarded @8%

¶25

p.a. (simple).

¶26

In view of the above:

¶27

i) TA No.46 of 2023 stands allowed.

¶28

ii) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.20,37,337/(Rupees Twenty Lakhs Thirty Seven Thousands Three Hundred and Thirty Seven Only/-) with future and pendentelite interest @8% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendants personally and also by proceeding against and sale of their assets including the hypothecated movables after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the TA.

¶29

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of

¶33

Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT

¶34

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶35

(Dictated to PA, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 13^th day of February, 2024)

¶36

Sd./-

¶37

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

¶38

M/s. Canara Bank v. M/s.612 International Clothing & Co.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Canara Bank v. M/s.612 International Clothing & 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

Punjab National Bank versus M/s. Tamilian Educational Academy

Indian Bank versus Mr. S. Parthasarathy

Indian Bank versus Rare India Exim Pvt. Ltd.

Indian Overseas Bank versus Rama Thamilarasan

Uco Bank versus M/s.Ahb Isfa Traders

Canara Bank versus Mr.T.Subramani (Deceased)