Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr.R.Balaji

DRT20 Mar 2024TA/58/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application filed for recovery certificate against commodity marketing loans. Evidence un-rebutted as defendant was absent ex parte. Court allowed claim, awarded principal plus future and pendentelite interest at 9% p.a., and issued Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs.23,90,166/- plus future and pendentelite interest @9% p.a. from date of filing till realization.

State Bank of India versus Mr.R.Balaji — Company and Corporate | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 20^th day of March, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

TA.No.58 of 2023

¶5

(Old OA.No.725/2019 - DRT-I, Chennai)

¶6

State Bank of India, Tindivanam Branch, No.137, Jawaharlal Nehru Street, Tindivanam, Villupuram District – 604 001. … Applicant.

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Mr.R.Balaji, S/o.Ramalingam, No.15C, Thiyagi Shanmugam Street, Tindivanam, Villupuram District – 604 001. And at M/s.Ramalinga Reddiyar Godown2, No.40/1, Endur Road, Molasur Village, Tindivanam, Villupuram District – 604 001. And at M/s.Sinuvasan Godown 5, No.12, Kaliamman Koil Street, Tindivanam, Villupuram District – 604 001. … Defendant. Counsel for Applicant : M/s.C.P.R.Kamaraj. Defendant : Exparte. ……

¶9

ORDER

¶10

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

¶11

And Bankruptcy Act, 1993 seeking for issuance of a Recovery

¶12

¶13

Certificate for Rs.23,90,166/- due in Commodity Based Marketing Loans availed by the defendant.

¶14

The Applicant contends that the defendant availed two Commodity Based Marketing Loans of Rs.32,00,000/- and Rs.13,28,000/- against hypothecation of paddy and rice stocks. It is further stated that the said facilities were secured by hypothecation of schedule mentioned paddy and rice stocks.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

Summons was taken out and as the defendant failed to appear he was set exparte on 10.08.2023.

¶18

The Applicant let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in confirmation with the pleadings and got marked Exhs.A1 to A12.

¶19

Heard. The following issues arise for consideration:

¶20

i) Whether the Applicant had proved the TA claim?

¶21

¶22

ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶23

Both these issues are decided together.

¶24

The Applicant’s evidence remains 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. Since the claim is arrived at by calculating interest at agreed rate which is on the higher side, pendentelite and future interest is awarded @9% p.a. (simple).

¶25

In view of the above

¶26

i) TA No.58/2023 stands allowed.

¶27

ii) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.23,90,166/(Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Ninety Thousands One Hundred and Sixty Six only) with future and pendentelite interest @9% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendant and also from his assets and by sale of schedule mentioned hypothecated stocks after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the TA.

¶28

¶29

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

¶30

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.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

(Dictated to PA, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 20^th day of March, 2024)

¶34

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

¶35

State Bank of India v. Mr.R.Balaji

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr.R.Balaji

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

SBI versus Suvaikin Alexander

Indian Overseas Bank versus Mr.v.Ramaiah (Deceased)

Indian Overseas Bank versus M/s.Jayashree Enterprises

State Bank of India versus Agrubber Industtry

Bank of India versus Durga Granites

The Federal Branch Ltd. versus Mrs. Divya T.