Allowed

Indian Bank v. Premkumar

DRT26 Mar 2024TA/386/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the applicant bank’s transfer for acceptance application for dues of approximately Rs. 75 lakh. After crediting amounts realized from the sale of mortgaged property, the court directed the issuance of a recovery certificate for the balance along with interest.

What did the court decide?

Issued Recovery Certificate for Rs. 75,07,135.26 plus 9% simple interest against defendants jointly, severally and personally.

Indian Bank versus Premkumar — Banking and Recovery | 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

TA No.386 of 2023

¶6

(Originally filed before DRT-I Chennai as OA No.235 of 2021 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.386 of 2023)

¶7

Indian Bank Yagappa Nagar Branch; Rep. by its Assistant Manager, Thanjavur District … Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Mr. M Prem Kumar S/o. Mr. R. Karunai Prakasam No.3/117, New No.592 Anna Street, Painganadu Mannargudi, Thanjavur District

¶10

Mr. R.Karunai Prakasam S/o. Mr. Pattathu Rani No.3/117, New No.592 Anna Street, Painganadu Mannargudi, Thanjavur District

¶11

Also at

¶12

No. G-5, Ranga Flats, Ramani Nagar Medical College Road, Thanjavur -613007 …Defendants Counsel for the Applicant Bank : M/s P.V. Murlidhar Counsel for Defendants : Ex-parte

¶13

FINAL ORDER

¶14

The Application is filed Under Section 19 (1) of the Recovery of Debt And Bankruptcy Act, 1993 seeking for issuance of a Recovery Certificate for Rs. 75,07,135.26 (Rupees Seventy Five Lakhs Seven Thousand One Hundred Thirty Five and Twenty Six paisa only) due in Term loan for Housing.

¶15

¶16

The above TA was originally filed before DRT-I and got transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as above.

¶17

The Applicant contents that a credit facility of Rs. 46,00,000/- was availed by the 1^st defendant and 2^nd defendant stood as a guarantor. It is also stated that the facility is secured by mortgage of schedule properties owned by 1^st defendant.

¶18

The Applicant further contents that despite availing the credit facility by obliging to pay back the amount in 234 equal monthly installments for Rs.45500/- , the defendant 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.

¶19

Summons was taken out and as the defendant failed to appear they were set exparte on 8.7.2022.

¶20

The Applicant let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in conformity with pleading and got marked Ext A1 to A9.

¶21

Heard, the following issues arise for consideration: -

¶22

(i) Whether the Applicant had proved the TA claim?

¶23

(ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶24

Both these issues are decided together.

¶25

The Applicant evidence remain un-rebutted and hence proved. The documents produced by the Applicant are found to be admissible and are

¶26

¶27

sufficient to prove TA claim. Hence the Applicant is to be found 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 with monthly rest, the pendente lite and further interest is awarded at 9% simple.

¶28

The applicant had filed a part satisfaction memo stating that the mortgaged properties was sold and an amount of Rs.49,75,000/- was realized which was recorded on 18.5.2023.

¶29

In view of the above, the following order is passed: -

¶30

(i) TA No.386 of 2023 stands allowed.

¶31

(ii) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.75,07,135.26 (Rupees Seventy Five Lakhs Seven Thousand One Hundred Thirty Five and Twenty Six paisa only) with future and pendente lite interest @ 9% simple P.A from the date of filing of the OA/TA till realization, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA/TA, including the amount of Rs.49,75,000/- recorded on 18.5.2023, from the defendants jointly, severally and personally and also by proceedings against defendant’s assets.

¶32

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

¶33

(iv) 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.

¶34

¶35

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

¶36

19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 6 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

Indian Bank v. Premkumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Premkumar

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 Cm Atheequr Rahman Co.

State Bank of India versus P. Kaviyarasan

Indian Bank versus M/s. Balaji Enterprises