Allowed

Indian Bank v. Mrs S Radha

DRT5 Mar 2024TA/854/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Debt Recovery Tribunal application, the bank sought a Recovery Certificate for approximately Rs.10.84 Lakhs outstanding on a home loan. The court found the claim proved and un-rebutted, allowing the application and directing the issuance of a Recovery Certificate with future and pendentelite interest.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.10,84,940.92 plus future and pendentelite interest at 8% p.a. from respondents; issuance of Recovery Certificate to Recovery Officer; costs of proceedings allowed.

Indian Bank versus Mrs S Radha — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI Dated this 5^th day of March, 2024

¶2

PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

TA.No.854 of 2023

¶4

(Old TA.No.33/2019 - DRT-I, Chennai) (Old OA.No.232/2019 - DRT-III, Chennai)

¶5

Indian Bank, Gajjalnaickenpatti Branch, Kandhili Post, Tirupattur Taluk, Vellore District – 635 901.

¶6

… Applicant.

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Mrs.S.Radha, W/o.C.Suresh, No.227/4B, Kandhili Village, Mottur Panchayat, Tirupattur Taluk, Vellore District – 635 901.

¶9

Mr.C.Suresh, S/o.Chennakesavan, No.227/4B, Kandhili Village, Mottur Panchayat, Tirupattur Taluk, Vellore District – 635 901.

¶10

Mr.P.Annadurai, S/o.Perumal, No.16A/NA, Mandalanayanagunda, Tirupattur Taluk, Vellore District – 635 901.

¶11

Mr.S.Thirupathy, S/o.Selvaraji, Vellipettai, Kandhili Village, Tirupattur Taluk, Vellore District – 635 901.

¶12

… Defendants.

¶13

¶14

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.T.Sundar Rajan. Defendants : Exparte.

¶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 Rs.10,84,940.92 due in Home Loan availed by the defendants.

¶17

The Applicant contends that the 1^st and 2^nd defendant as availed Home Loan of Rs.8,00,000/- for which 3^rd and 4^th defendants stood as guarantors. It is also stated that the said facility was secured by mortgage of schedule mentioned property.

¶18

It is further 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.

¶19

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.

¶20

Summons was taken out and as the defendants failed to appear, they were set exparte on 18.12.2017.

¶21

¶22

The Applicant let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in

¶23

confirmation with the pleadings and got marked Exhs.A1 to A24.

¶24

Heard. The following issues arise for consideration:

¶25

i) Whether the Applicant had proved the TA claim?

¶26

ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶27

Both these issues are decided together.

¶28

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 TA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at agreed rate and the facility is for Home Loan, pendentelite and future interest is awarded @8% p.a. (simple).

¶29

In view of the above

¶30

i) TA No.854/2023 stands allowed.

¶31

ii) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.10,84,940.92 (Rupees Ten Lakhs Eighty Four Thousands Nine Hundred Forty and Ninety Two Paise only) with future and pendentelite interest @8% p.a. (simple) from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendants jointly, severally, personally

¶32

¶33

and also from their assets including the sale of schedule mentioned properties after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the TA.

¶34

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.

¶35

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.

¶36

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

¶37

Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993.

¶38

(Dictated to PA, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 5^th day of March, 2024)

¶39

Sd./-

¶40

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

¶41

Indian Bank v. Mrs S Radha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Mrs S Radha

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 R Natarajan

Union Bank of India versus Jaishankar

Bank of Baroda versus Mr.N.Ramanathan