Allowed

Canara Bank v. M/s..Kalyani Traders

DRT5 Feb 2024TA/211/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In TA No.211 of 2023, this Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank applicant's claim for a recovery certificate of Rs.23.28 lakh with interest. The applicant proved its suit by un-rebutted documentary evidence, and the tribunal directed the defendant's properties to be sold for recovery.

What did the court decide?

Approval of Recovery Certificate for Rs.23,28,579.16 with future interest at 11.65% p.a. to be recovered from mortgaged properties and other assets.

Canara Bank versus M/s..Kalyani Traders — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI Dated this 5^th day of February, 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

T.A.No.211 of 2023

¶4

(Old OA.No.556/2019-DRT-I, Chennai)

¶5

Canara Bank, Panruti Branch, IFSC – CNRB0002754, Represented by its Senior Manager, No.18, Kamarajar Nagar, Annai Indira Gandhi Salai, Panruti – 607 106. Cuddalore District.

¶6

… Applicant.

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Mr.S.Sivakumar, Proprietor of M/s.Kalyani Traders, S/o. Shri Sambanthamoorthy, PAN – DTFPS6117H No.14, South Street, Meliruppu, Keezhuruppu (PO), Panruti, Cuddalore District – 607 103. Also at: No.41/1, Neyveli Main Road, Meliruppu, Panruti, Cuddalore District – 607 103.

¶9

Mr.G.Karuna Moorthy, S/o.Mr.T.Gandhi, No.79, West Street, Alagappa Samudram (PO), Arasadi Kuppam, Panruti, Cuddalore District. … Defendants.

¶10

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.M.Muthukumaran. Defendants : Exparte.

¶11

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The Application is filed Under Section 19 (1) of the Recovery of Debts And Bankruptcy Act, 1993 seeking for issuance of a Recovery Certificate for Rs.23,28,579.16 due in the facility of secured OCC facility availed by the defendants.

¶14

The Applicant contends that a secured OCC of Rs.10,00,000/- which was later enhanced to Rs.20,00,000/- was availed by 1^st defendant. The 2^nd defendant stood as guarantor. It is also stated that the facility is secured by mortgage of schedule mentioned properties.

¶15

The Applicant further contends that despite availing the credit facility 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.

¶16

Summons was taken out and as the defendants failed to appear, they were set exparte on 20.11.2019.

¶17

The Applicant let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in confirmation with the pleadings and got marked Exhs.A1 to A38.

¶18

Heard. The following issues arise for consideration:

¶19

i) Whether the Applicant had proved the TA claim?

¶20

ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶21

¶22

Both these issues are decided together.

¶23

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 TA claim. Hence the Applicant is found to be entitled for the TA claim. The TA claim is made within limitation and there is no capitalization of penal interest.

¶24

In view of the above

¶25

i) TA No.211of 2023 stands allowed.

¶26

ii) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.23,28,579.16 (Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousands Five Hundred Seventy Nine and Paise Sixteen only) with future and pendentelite interest @11.65% with monthly rests from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendants and their assets after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the TA.

¶27

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.

¶28

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.

¶29

¶30

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.

¶31

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

¶32

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶33

(Dictated to PA, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 5^th day of February, 2024)

¶34

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

¶35

Canara Bank v. M/s..Kalyani Traders

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. M/s..Kalyani Traders

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

Canara Bank versus Govindarasu

Hdfc Bank versus Mani Sundar

City Union Bank Limited versus Joseph

M/s.Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd. versus Mr.Padmanaban

Union Bank of India versus a S Selvam

Bank of Baroda versus Dhandayudhapani