Allowed

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) v. M/S Navashakti Auto Fuels

DRT21 Feb 2024TA/2/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an application under Section 19(1) of the RDB Act for recovery of a debt. The bank's evidence was un-rebutted and sufficient to prove the timeline claim. A recovery certificate was issued permitting recovery of the principal amount along with interest and future claims against the parties and their assets.

What did the court decide?

Issued a Recovery Certificate permitting recovery of Rs. 3,68,17,780 plus future interest at 12.65% p.a.; sale of schedule properties if proceeds insufficient.

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) versus M/S Navashakti Auto Fuels — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI Dated this 21^st day of February, 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

T.A.No.2 of 2023

¶4

(Old OA.No.460/2020-DRT-I, Chennai)

¶5

Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank) Anna Nagar Branch Anna Nagar Branch – II, No. 18^th Mani Road, Anna Nagar West Chennai – 600 040

¶6

…Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

M/s. Navasakthi Auto Fuels, Represented by its proprietor, R.A Rajapandian No. 34, Vandalur to Walajabad Road, Karaniathangal Village, Mattur Post, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kanchipuram District, Chennai – 602 105

¶9

Mr. R.A. Rajapandian S/o. Mr. R.A.R.Annamalai Block A3 D3, Golden Fortune, Southern Enclave, Nolambur Main Road, Mogappair, Chennai – 600 107

¶10

Also at: Mr. R. A. Rajapandian 49, Jardain 3B, 3^rd Floor, Pulla Avenue, Shenoy Nagar, Chennai – 600 030

¶11

¶12

Mrs. Sasikala Rajapandian, W/o. Mr. R. A. Rajapandian Block A3 D3, Golden Fortune, Southern Enclave, Nolambur Main Road, Mogappair, Chennai – 600 107

¶13

Also at:

¶14

Mrs. Sasikala Rajapandian 49, Jardain, 3B, 3^rd Floor, Pulla Avenue, Shenoy Nagar, Chennai – 600 030

¶15

Mr. J. Sivakumar S/o. Ponjanagan No. 123, Mannachey Main Road, Kundrathur, Sakthi Nagar, Porur, Chennai – 600 116

¶16

Also at:

¶17

Mr. J. Sivakumar 32/50, Somasundaram Avenue, Sakthi Nagar, Porur, Chennai – 600 116 …Defendants

¶18

Counsel for Applicant :M/s. K.V. Subramanian Associatez Defendants : Exparte

¶19

…

¶20

ORDER

¶21

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

¶22

And Bankruptcy Act,1993 seeking for issuance of a Recovery Certificate for Rs.3,68,17,780/-due in the SOD credit facility along

¶23

¶24

with future interest and costsand for sale of schedule mentioned properties.

¶25

The Applicant Bank contends thatanSOD Credit facility of Rs.1,50,00,000/- was availed by the 2^nd Defendant – Proprietor on behalf of the 1^st Defendant - Proprietary Concern. It is also stated that the Defendants D3 and D4 stood as guarantors. Additionally, the credit facilityis also secured by mortgage of schedule mentioned properties.

¶26

It is also stated that the above facilities were availed by the defendants after execution of necessary loan documents obliging themselves to repay the amount promptly and regularly, without fail.

¶27

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

¶28

Summons was taken out and as defendants failed to enter appearance, they were set exparte on 23.01.2024.

¶29

The Applicant Bank let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in confirmation with the pleadings and got marked ExbsA1 to A24.

¶30

Heard. The following issues arise for consideration.

¶31

¶32

i. Whether the Applicant Bank had proved the TA claim?

¶33

ii. What orders are to be passed?

¶34

Both these issues are decided together.

¶35

The Applicant Bank’s evidences remain un-rebutted and hence proved. The documents produced by the Applicant Bank are found to be admissible and are sufficient to prove the TA claim. Hence the Applicant Bank is found to be entitled for the TA claim. The TA claim is made within limitation and there is no capitalization of penal interest. Since the TA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at agreed rate, which is on the higher side, prayer for monthly rests and for penal interest is declined.

¶36

In view of the above:

¶37

i. TA. No: 2of 2023stands allowed.

¶38

ii. Applicant Bank is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.3,68,17,780/- (Rupees Three Crores Sixty Eight Lakhs Seventeen Thousand Seven Hundred And Eighty Only/)together with future and pendentelite interest @ 12.65%p.a. (simple) from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendants after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the TA.

¶39

¶40

iii. It is made clear that the defendants D2, D3 and D4are personally liable for all such amounts due in the Loan accounts.

¶41

iv. The schedule mentioned properties 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.

¶42

v. A Recovery Certificate is to be drawn and issued to the recovery Officer to enable recovery of the amounts as per the above terms.

¶43

vi. Applicant Bank 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.

¶44

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶45

terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶46

(Dictated to PA-2, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 21^st day of February, 2024)

¶47

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

¶48

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) v. M/S Navashakti Auto Fuels

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) v. M/S Navashakti Auto Fuels

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

The Federal Bank Limited versus M/s M.K.R. Traders Private Limited

Idbi Bank Limited versus Mr.Manimaran

Idbi Bank Limited versus M/s. Sri Krishna Cashews

Canara Bank versus M/s Selakshan Contractors

State Bank of India versus S. Aravind Kumar

State Bank of India, versus Thiru Arooran Sugars Limited