Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Mr. v Varaprakasam

DRT26 Mar 2024TA/757/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Recovery Tribunal allowed application by Bank of Baroda for issuance of recovery certificate against three defendants regarding agricultural loans of Rs. 6,00,000 and Rs. 2,14,000 unsubstantiated evidence and liability for principal and interest.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate for Rs. 35,03,820.98 plus 8% p.a. interest to be recovered from joint and several liability of defendants against loan account.

Bank of Baroda versus Mr. v. Varaprakasam — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI Dated this 26^th day of March, 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

T.A.No.757of 2023

¶4

(Old OA.No.445/2020-DRT-I, Chennai)

¶5

Bank of Baroda Anguchettipalayam Branch, 116, Salem Main Road, Anguchettipalayam, Panruti – 607 110

¶6

…Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Mr. V. Varaprakasam S/o. Mr. Vaithilingam, No. 24/2, Madha Koil Street, Elanthampattu Post, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District.

¶9

Also at: Door No. 3/685, TNSTC. Oliyor Nagar, Kandamannadi, Villupuram – 605 401

¶10

Mr. K. Jayakandan S/o. Mr. Kaliyaperumal, Madha Koil Street, Elanthampattu Post, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District

¶11

Mrs. M. Santhi W/o. V. Kannaiyan S. Eripalayam, Semakottai Post, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District Also at:

¶12

No. 72, Transport Nagar, Maruthadu Post, Cuddalore – 607 109 ...Defendants

¶13

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.J. Ramanathan Defendants : Exparte

¶14

¶15

ORDER

¶16

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 a total sum of Rs.35,03,820.98Pdue under the 2 Produce – Term Loan Accounts along with future interest and costs and for sale of schedule mentioned hyptoheca.

¶17

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

¶18

The Applicant Bank contends that an Agricultural Development Loan credit facility of Rs. 6,00,000/- and an Agricultural Crop Loan credit facility of Rs. 2,14,000/- were availed by the 1^st Defendant. The 2^nd defendant stood as Guarantor for the Agricultural Development Loan and the 3^rd Defendant stood as Guarantor for the Agricultural Crop Loan. It is also stated that the credit facilities are secured by hypothecation of schedule mentioned properties.

¶19

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

¶20

¶21

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

¶22

Summons was taken out and though the defendants entered appearance, failed to file reply statement and hence, they were set exparte on05.05.2022.

¶23

The Applicant Bank let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in confirmation with the pleadings and got marked Exhs.A1 to A19.

¶24

Heard. The following issues arise for consideration.

¶25

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

¶26

ii. What orders are to be passed?

¶27

Both these issues are decided together.

¶28

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. Interest is awarded @ 8% p.a. (simple).

¶29

In view of the above:

¶30

¶31

i. TA. No: 757of 2023 stands allowed.

¶32

ii. Applicant Bank is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.35,03,820.98P(Rupees Thirty Five Lakhs Three Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty and Ninety Eight Paise Only/-)together with future and pendentelite interest @ 8% p.a. (simple) on Rs. 27,20,287.50P from 1^st and 2^nd Defendants jointly, severally and personally and @8% p.a. on Rs. 7,83,533.48Pfrom 1^st and 3^rd Defendants jointly, severally and personally and also by proceeding against the hypothecated assets from the date of filing of the TA till realization.

¶33

iii. 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

iv. 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

v. 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.

¶36

¶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 (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶39

(Dictated to PA-2, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 26^th day of March, 2024)

¶40

Sd/-

¶41

(T. RAJESH)

¶42

PRESIDING OFFICER DRT–II, CHENNAI

¶43

Bank of Baroda v. Mr. v Varaprakasam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Mr. v Varaprakasam

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

Bamk of Baroda versus S. Indira

Indian Overseas Bank versus Muthukumar

Bank of Baroda versus . G. Rajesh

State Bank of India versus Cm Atheequr Rahman Co.

State Bank of India versus P. Kaviyarasan

Indian Bank versus M/s. Balaji Enterprises