Allowed

State Bank of India v. Mr. N. Ramanathan

DRT27 Mar 2024TA/915/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application under Section 19(1) of the RDB Act for issuance of a Recovery Certificate. The court found the applicant's evidence un-rebutted and sufficient to prove the claim against the defendants for a housing loan default, setting future interest at 9.45%. A recovery certificate was directed to be issued.

What did the court decide?

Recovery Certificate issued for Rs. 32,76,109.33 with future and pendente lite interest @ 9.45% simple per annum from the date of filing.

State Bank of India versus Mr. N. Ramanathan — 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.915 of 2023

¶6

(Originally filed before DRT-I Chennai as OA No.263 of 2019 and thereafter transferred To this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.915 of 2023)

¶7

State Bank of India Retail Assets Central Processing Centre, SARC Division Represented by the Chief Manager, No. 16, Whannels Road, Egmore, Chennai-600008 ….Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Mr. N. Ramanathan S/o. Mr. R M. Narayanan No.5A/1, Sai Abimansa Murphy Doss Road Dr. Seethapathy Nagar, Velachery Chennai-600042

¶10

M/s. Real Value Promoters Pvt Ltd Rep.by its Director, 17/1, Poes Road, 2^nd street, Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018 ….Defendants Counsel for the Applicant Bank : M/s Raj & Raj Associates Counsel for 1^st Defendant : M/s Nathan & Associates 2^nd defendant : …..

¶11

FINAL ORDER

¶12

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. 32,76,109.33p(Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs Seventy Six Thousand One Hundred Nine and Thirty Three paisa only) due in Credit Facility of Housing Loan availed by the 1^st defendant.

¶13

¶14

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

¶15

The Applicant contents that a credit facility of Rs. 35,00,000/- was availed by the 1^st defendant and an agreement was executed on 31.10.2013 where by the 2^nd defendant the builder had undertaken to compensate the applicant in the event of their failure to complete the construction. It is also contended that the 1^st defendant had executed an agreement whereby he undertook to create the mortgage. It is also stated that the amount sanctioned was also disbursed periodically.

¶16

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 the builder failed in completing the construction the efforts of the Applicant to make the defendants pay back the amount failed forcing the Applicant to file this Application.

¶17

Summons was taken out and as the defendant though entered appearance failed in filing reply statement and the chance was closed on 24.9.2019.

¶18

The Applicant let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in conforming with pleading and got marked Ext A1 to A13.

¶19

Heard, the following issues arise for consideration: -

¶20

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

¶21

(ii) What orders are to be passed?

¶22

Both these issues are decided together.

¶23

¶24

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 arrived at by calculating interest at contractual rate which is on the higher side the pendente lite and future interest is awarded at 9.45% per annum simple.

¶25

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

¶26

(a) TA No.915 of 2023 stands allowed.

¶27

(b) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs. 32,76,109.33p (Rupees Thirty Two Lakhs Seventy Six Thousand One Hundred Nine and Thirty Three paisa only) with future and pendente lite interest @ 9.45% simple P.A 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 defendant jointly, severally and personally against 1^st defendant and also by sale of their assets after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the TA.

¶28

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

¶29

(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.

¶30

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

State Bank of India v. Mr. N. Ramanathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State Bank of India v. Mr. N. Ramanathan

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