Allowed

Indian Bank v. Mr. S. Parthasarathy

DRT12 Feb 2024TA/819/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed the transfer application filed by Indian Bank against a defaulting borrower for recovery of an outstanding housing loan of Rs.50,22,095/ along with future and pendentelite interest at 9% p.a. (simple) and issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Allowed transfer application permitting recovery of Rs.50,22,095/ with future and pendentlite interest @9% p.a. from date of filing and issuance of Recovery Certificate.

Indian Bank versus Mr. S. Parthasarathy — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI Dated this 12^th day of February, 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SHRI T. RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

T.A. No. 819 of 2023 (Old OA. No. 741/2019-DRT-I, Chennai)

¶4

INDIAN BANK Rep. by its Senior Manager Anna Nagar Branch, F48, New. NO. 54, 1^st Avenue, Anna Nagar East, Chennai-600102 … Applicant

¶5

¶6

Mr. S. PARTHASARATHY, S/o M. Shanmugam 362/1, 37^th Street,T.V.S.Avenue, Anna Nagar West Extn. Chennai-600101. .. . Defendant

¶7

Counsel for the Applicant : M/s. S. Pandurangan Defendant : Exparte

¶8

…

¶9

ORDER

¶10

The above Transfer Application is filed under section 19 of the Recovery

¶11

of Debts and Bankruptcy Act seeking recovery of a total sum of

¶12

¶13

Rs.50,22,095/-(Rupees Fifty Lakhs Twenty Two Thousand Ninety Five

¶14

only)with further interest from the date of filing of the TA and also by allowing the same to be recovered from the defendants personally and

¶15

also by allowing to proceed against and selling scheduled mentioned property.

¶16

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

¶17

The case of the Applicant Bank can be encapsulated as follows:

¶18

The defendant availed a housing loan for 45,00,000/- from erstwhile Allahabad Bank which later got amalgamated with Applicant Bank here in.

¶19

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

¶20

Apart fromexecution of the necessary loan documents, the defendant had created security by way of equitable mortgage over the schedule mentioned property as the title documents and construction agreements were deposited with the application.

¶21

¶22

Even though the defendant had obliged himself to repay the amount promptly and regularly, he failed to do so resulting defaults in the account and the same being declared as NPAon 12.10.2018.

¶23

The Applicant Bank’s officials had on many occasions approached the defendant requesting to regularize the account and despite the same, no effort was made by the defendant to get the account regularized over to pay back the amount. Even as no repayment was made despite repeated requests, the Applicant Bankhad on 15.10.2018caused to issue a demand notice requiring repayment of the amount due in the account.

¶24

It is also the case of the Applicant Bank that, despite repeated reminders and requests, the defendanthad failed to make the repayment forcing the Applicant Bank to file this TA seeking recovery of the amount due in the account with further interest and cost.

¶25

Thedefendant failed to enter appearance and thus hewas set exparteby the order dated 13.02.2020.

¶26

The Applicant Bank had let in evidence through AW1 who had sworn to a Proof Affidavit in terms of the pleadings in the TA and also produced Exhs.A1 to A19and got the samemarked in evidence.

¶27

¶28

Heard the counsel for the Applicant Bank and considered the

¶29

contentions as taken in the TA in the light of documentary evidence and proof affidavit.

¶30

The following issues arise for consideration in this matter.

¶31

i) Whether the Applicant Bank had succeeded in proving the TA claim?

¶32

ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶33

Boththese issues are gone into and decided together.

¶34

12. The case put forth by the Applicant Bank in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant remain exparte. The evidence tendered by the Applicant Bank remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences put forth by the Applicant Bank were found admissible. From the statement of accounts as produced by the Applicant Bank, it is evident that the amount as claimed in the TA is outstanding in the account, which the Applicant Bank is entitled to get recovered from the defendants and his assets (including the scheduled mentioned property). The claim of the Applicant Bank is well within the period of limitation and there is no Capitalization of penal interest. Since the facility is a Housing Loan and TA claim is arrived at by calculating

¶35

¶36

interest at agreed rate, the pendentelite and future interest is awarded

¶37

at 9% p.a. (simple).

¶38

In view of the finding as entered above:

¶39

i) TA No: 819/2023 stands allowed. ii) Applicant Bank is permitted to recover anamount of Rs.50,22,095/-(Rupees Fifty Lakhs Twenty Two Thousand Ninety Five only/-) with future and pendentelite interest @9% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing of the TA till realization from thedefendantpersonally and from his assets including the schedule mentioned propertyafter giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the TA.

¶40

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.

¶41

iv) 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.

¶42

¶43

Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in

¶44

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

¶45

(Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶46

(Dictated to PA-2, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 12^th day of February, 2024)

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

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

¶49

Indian Bank v. Mr. S. Parthasarathy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Mr. S. Parthasarathy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Canara Bank versus M/s.Subish Plastics

Indian Overseas Bank versus Mr. v. Pachamuthu

Bank of India versus Veeralakshmi

Hdfc Bank versus Kandaswamy Rajalakshmi

Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) versus Palkannan

Indian Bank versus Rare India Exim Pvt. Ltd.