Allowed

Canara Bank v. R Dhandapani and Two Others

DRT21 Mar 2024TA/741/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application for issuance of a recovery certificate against defendants for an agricultural loan default, awarding principal with 8% simple interest.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of a recovery certificate for Rs. 21,85,418.45 with 8% p.a. simple interest recoverable from the first defendant personally and his assets. Claim against deceased second defendant declined.

Canara Bank versus R Dhandapani and Two Others — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 21^st day of March, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH

¶4

PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

TA.No.741 of 2023

¶6

(Old OA.No.70/2019 - DRT-I, Chennai)

¶7

Canara Bank, 1, Bazaar Street, Panapakkam, Arakonam Taluk, Vellore District. Represented by its Manager. … Applicant.

¶8

Vs.

¶9

R.Dhandapani, S/o.Raman, 4/223, Vellalar Street, Malapulam Mottur Village, Arakonam Taluk, Vellore District.

¶10

R.Saraswathy, W/o. Raman, 4/223, Vellalar Street, Malapulam Mottur Village, Arakonam Taluk, Vellore District.

¶11

G.Latha, W/o.Gopal, 4/223, Vellalar Street, Malapulam Mottur Village, Arakonam Taluk, Vellore District. … Defendants. Counsel for Applicant : M/s.S.R.Sumathy. Defendants 1 and 3 : Exparte. 2^nd Defendant : Deceased. ……

¶12

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The Application is filed Under Section 19 (1) of the Recovery of Debts And Bankruptcy Act, 1993 seeking for issuance of a Recovery Certificate for Rs.21,85,418.45 due in Agricultural Loan availed by the defendants.

¶15

The Applicant contends that the 1^st defendant availed Agricultural Loan of Rs.6,80,000/- for purchase of Tractor and Trailer. It is stated that the said facility was secured by mortgage of ‘B’ schedule mentioned properties and also by hypothecation of ‘A’ schedule mentioned assets.

¶16

It is also stated that the above facility was availed after execution of necessary loan documents by defendants obliging themselves to repay the amount promptly and regularly, without fail.

¶17

The Applicant further contends that despite availing the credit facility by obliging to pay back the amount, the defendants 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.

¶18

Summons was taken out and as the 1^st and 3^rd defendants failed to enter appearance they were set exparte on 31.07.2019. Summons to

¶19

¶20

D2 returned unserved as ‘Deceased’ and no legal heirs were impleaded in spite of sufficient opportunities.

¶21

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

¶22

Heard. The following issues arise for consideration:

¶23

i) Whether the Applicant had proved the TA claim?

¶24

ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶25

Both these issues are decided together.

¶26

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 @8% p.a. (simple).

¶27

In view of the above

¶28

i) TA No.741/2023 stands allowed.

¶29

ii) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.21,85,418.45 (Rupees Twenty One Lakhs Eighty Five Thousands Four Hundred Eighteen and Paise Forty Five only) with future and pendentelite interest @8% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing

¶30

¶31

of the TA till realization from the 1^st defendant personally and also from his assets including the sale of schedule mentioned properties after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the TA. The claim against deceased D2 is declined.

¶32

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.

¶33

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.

¶34

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶35

(Dictated to PA, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 21^st day of March, 2024)

¶36

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

¶37

Canara Bank v. R Dhandapani and Two Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. R Dhandapani and Two Others

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

State Bank of India versus Agrubber Industtry

Bank of India versus Durga Granites

The Federal Branch Ltd. versus Mrs. Divya T.

Syndicate Bank versus Sanswe Dairy and Two Others

City Union Bank Limited versus M/s. Sri Balaji Enterprises

Canara Bank versus M/s. Ayisha Bag House Footwear