Allowed

Indian Overseas Bank v. M.Rajesh Kumar

DRT19 Feb 2024TA/666/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Appellant Bank obtained a recovery certificate of Rs. 27,78,821/- against the defendant for an unsecured term loan. The court held the evidence un-rebutted, allowing future interest at 11.20% p.a. and authorizing sale of secured properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery certificate issued for Rs. 27,78,821/- plus future interest @ 11.20% p.a.; authority granted to sell secured properties.

Indian Overseas Bank versus M.Rajesh Kumar — Company and Corporate | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 19^th day ofFebruary, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

T.A.No.666 of 2023

¶5

(Old OA.No.347/2020-DRT-I, Chennai)

¶6

Indian Overseas Bank Kandamangalam Branch IFSC: IOBA0002693 Pondy Villupuram Main Road, Kandamangalam, Villupuram District – 605 102 …Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Mr. M Rajesh Kumar S/o. Mr. Mahimainathan, Door No. 88, Kattabomman Nagar, Panankuppam, Koliyanoor Post, Villupuram District – 605 103

¶9

Also at:

¶10

No. 21 ,Navammal Kapper, Kandamangalam, Villupuram District – 605 102 ...Defendant Counsel for Applicant : M/s.Ananda Gomathy Defendant : Exparte ……

¶11

ORDER

¶12

The Application is filed Under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of DebtsAnd Bankruptcy Act,1993 seeking for issuance of a Recovery Certificate for a total sum of Rs.27,78,821/-due in the Term

¶13

¶14

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

¶15

The above Original Application is filed before the DRT-I and stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as above.

¶16

The Applicant Bank contends thata Term Loan credit facility of Rs.23,46,000/- was availed by the defendant. It is also stated that the facilities are secured by hypothecation of schedule mentioned properties.

¶17

It is also stated that the above facilities were availed after execution of necessary loan documents by the defendant on 17.12.2014, obliging to repay the amount promptly and regularly, without fail.

¶18

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

¶19

Summons was taken out and as defendant failed to enter appearance, he was set exparte on 06.12.2021.

¶20

The Applicant Bank let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in confirmation with the pleadings and got marked Exhs.A1 to A8.

¶21

Heard. The following issues arise for consideration.

¶22

¶23

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

¶24

ii. What orders are to be passed?

¶25

Both these issues are decided together.

¶26

1. 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, prayer for monthly rests and penal interest is declined.

¶27

In view of the above:

¶28

i. TA. No: 666of 2023 stands allowed.

¶29

ii. Applicant Bank is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.27,78,821/-(Rupees Twenty Seven Lakhs Seventy EightThousand EightHundred and Twenty OneOnly/-)together with future and pendentelite interest @ 11.20% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendantand also proceeding against and selling the schedule mentioned properties and appropriate the sale proceeds towards the decretal dues.

¶30

¶31

iii. If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amounts due and payable to the Applicant Bank, the defendant is personally liable for all such amounts due.

¶32

iv. It is further ordered that any amount remitted or realized during the course of the proceedings, shall be given due credit to the loan account of the defendant.

¶33

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.

¶34

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.

¶35

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶36

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

¶37

(Dictated to PA-2, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 19^th day ofFebruary, 2024)

¶38

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

¶39

Indian Overseas Bank v. M.Rajesh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Overseas Bank v. M.Rajesh Kumar

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 Mr. C. Prakasam

Punjab & Sind Bank versus Mr. Tagore Sampath Jaikumar a

Punjab National Bank versus Thirupathy

State Bank of India, versus Mr.S.Syed Ghouse

Idbi Bank versus Sangeetha

Idbi Bank Limited versus M/s.C.K.Traders