Allowed

Indian Bank v. R Natarajan

DRT5 Mar 2024TA/67/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed the bank's application for a recovery certificate regarding an educational term loan. With un-rebutted evidence proving the claim, the court awarded principal plus 6% simple interest and directed the sale of mortgaged properties while holding defendants personally liable or liable within the estate limits.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs.23,35,565/- plus 6% p.a. simple interest; authority to sell schedule properties.

Indian Bank versus R Natarajan — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 5^th day ofMarch, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

T.A.No.67of 2023

¶5

(Old OA.No.188/2021-DRT-I, Chennai)

¶6

M/s. Indian Bank Sacred Heart Convent Branch, 495 – 496, East Pondy Road, Villupuram District

¶7

…Applicant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Mr. R. Natarajan Son of Ramakrishnan, No. 285, Velan Street, Sudhakar Nagar, Villupuram – 605 602

¶10

R. N. Narendran Son of R. Natarajan, No. 285, Velan Street, Sudhakar Nagar, Villupuram – 605 602

¶11

R. N. Vasantharaj Son of R. Natarajan, No. 285, Velan Street, Sudhakar Nagar, Villupuram – 605 602 ...Defendants Counsel for Applicant : M/s.S. Parthasarathy Defendants : Exparte

¶12

¶13

ORDER

¶14

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.23,35,565/-due under the Educational Term Loan A/c. along 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 thatan Education Term Loan Credit facility of Rs.9,00,000/- was availed by the deceased daughter of the 1^st defendantand 1^st defendant as borrower and deceased wife of 1^st Defendant as Guarantor.The defendants 2 and 3 are legal heirs of the deceased guarantor.It is also stated that the facilities are secured by mortgageof schedule mentioned properties.

¶17

It is also stated that the above facilities were availed after execution of necessary loan documents by the defendants, obliging themselves 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 defendants failed in compliance of the same and all the efforts of the Applicant Bank to

¶19

¶20

make the defendants pay back the amounts failed, forcing the Applicant Bank to file this Application.

¶21

Summons was taken out and as defendants failed to enter appearance, theywere set exparte on 02.02.2024.

¶22

The Applicant Bank let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in confirmation with the pleadings and got marked Exhs.A1 to A16.

¶23

Heard. The following issues arise for consideration.

¶24

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

¶25

ii. What orders are to be passed?

¶26

Both these issues are decided together.

¶27

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, and also taking note of the fact that the facility is educational loan where the beneficiary is no more, prayer formonthly rests and penal interest is declined and pendentelite and future interest is awarded 6% p.a. (simple).

¶28

In view of the above:

¶29

¶30

i. TA. No: 67of 2023 stands allowed.

¶31

ii. Applicant Bank is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.23,35,565/-(Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Thirty FiveThousand FiveHundred and Sixty FiveOnly/-)together with future and pendentelite interest @ 6% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendantsand also proceeding against and selling the schedule mentioned properties and appropriate the sale proceeds towards the decretal dues.

¶32

iii. If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amounts due and payable to the Applicant Bank, the defendant D1is personally liable for all such amounts due. D2 and D3 are liable only to the extend of assets inherited from the deceased Guarantor - Vasanthi. K.

¶33

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 defendants.

¶34

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.

¶35

¶36

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.

¶37

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶38

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

¶39

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶40

(Dictated to PA-2, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 5^ht day ofMarch, 2024)

¶41

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

¶42

Indian Bank v. R Natarajan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. R Natarajan

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

Hdfc Bank Limited versus Mr. K. Saravanakumar

City Union Bank Limited versus M/s. Mars Enterprises

State Bank of India versus Murugan Thailan Murugesan

Indian Bank versus Mrs S Radha

Union Bank of India versus Jaishankar

Bank of Baroda versus Mr.N.Ramanathan