Allowed

Union Bank of India v. Sundararajan

DRT27 Mar 2024TA/727/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant bank sought issuance of a Recovery Certificate for an outstanding term loan under the RDB Act. The Tribunal allowed the application and directed recoverable amount along with future and pendente lite interest from the respondents jointly, severally, and personally, or by sale of secured properties.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued permitting realization of Rs. 12,85,849/- with future and pendente lite interest @ 8% p.a. jointly, severally, and personally, or by sale of mortgaged properties.

Union Bank of India versus Sundararajan — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II AT CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 27^th day of March, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SHRI T. RAJESH

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

TA No.727 of 2023

¶6

(Originally filed before DRT-I Chennai as OA No.144 of 2020 and thereafter transferred

¶7

to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.727 of 2023)

¶8

Union Bank of India (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) Madur Branch, Rep.by its Manager Mr. K.Sesha Sai Kumar Veeracholapuram, Durgam Main Road, Madur Post, Madur-606206, Kallakurichi Taluk, Villupuram District ….Applicant

¶9

Versus

¶10

Mr. K Sundararajan S/o. Mr. Kandasamy Gounder No. 284, South Street, V.Palayam Kallakurichi Taluk, Villupuram-606206

¶11

Mrs. S.Tamilarasi, W/o. K Sundararajan S/o. Mr. Kandasamy Gounder No. 284, South Street, V.Palayam Kallakurichi Taluk, Villupuram-606206 ...Defendants

¶12

Counsel for the Applicant Bank : M/s A. Arun Babu 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.12,85,849/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Eighty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Forty Nine only) due in Credit Facility of Term Loan. Construction loan and

¶15

¶16

land development loan availed by the defendants from erstwhile Corporation Bank.

¶17

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

¶18

The Applicant contents that a credit facility of Rs. 3,00,000/-, 5,00,000/- and 3,75,000/- were availed by the defendants being borrower and co-borrower respectively. It is also stated that the facility is secured by mortgage of scheduled properties belonged to the 1^st defendant.

¶19

The Applicant further contents that despite availing the credit facility 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 defendants pay back the amount including issuance of a demand notice on 20.4.2019 failed forcing the Applicant to file this Application.

¶20

Summons was taken out and as the defendant failed to appear they were set ex-parte on 2.8.2022.

¶21

The Applicant let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in confirming with the pleadings and got marked Ext A1 to A31.

¶22

Heard, the following issues arise for consideration: -

¶23

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

¶24

(b) What orders are to be passed?

¶25

Both these issues are decided together.

¶26

¶27

The Applicant evidence remained un-rebutted and hence proved. The documents produced by the Applicant are found to be admissible and are 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 which is on the higher side pendente lite and future interest is awarded at 8% Per annum (simple).

¶28

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

¶29

(a) TA No.727 of 2023 stands allowed.

¶30

(b) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.12,85,849/- (Rupees Twelve Lakhs Eighty Five Thousand Eight Hundred Forty Nine only) with future and pendente lite interest @ 8% PA (simple) 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, from the defendants jointly, severally and personally and also by sale of schedule mentioned property after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the TA.

¶31

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

¶32

(d) 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.

¶33

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

(Dictated to PA, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open court, this the 27^th day of March, 2024)

¶37

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

¶38

Union Bank of India v. Sundararajan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. Sundararajan

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 G. Edison

Bank of Baroda versus Jayakandan

State Bank of India versus Mr. S. Natarajan

State Bank of India versus Paramesh

State Bank of India versus Sri Vivekananda Builders

Canara Bank versus Mr. S. Pannerselvam