Allowed

M/s. Indian Overseas Bank v. Mr. C. Rajasekaran

DRT8 Mar 2024TA/941/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application filed by a bank to recover a housing loan default. The court found the bank's documentary evidence un-rebutted and sufficient to establish the claim. The Debt Recovery Tribunal permitted recovery of the principal amount along with future interest at 9% p.a. and directed the issuance of a Recovery Certificate.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of Recovery Certificate; Direction to recover Rs. 58,75,669 with interest @ 9% p.a. and sale of schedule properties.

M/s. Indian Overseas Bank versus Mr. C. Rajasekaran — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI

¶2

Dated this 8^th day of March, 2024

¶3

PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH PRESIDING OFFICER

¶4

T.A.No.941of 2023

¶5

(Old OA.No.147/2021-DRT-I, Chennai)

¶6

M/s. Indian Overseas Bank, MMDA Nagar Branch, B – 5, Water Tank Road, MMDA Nagar, Chennai – 600 106 …Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Mr. C. Rajasekaran, S/o. Chandran, New No. 4/424, Old No. 4/413, VOC Street, Shridi Sai Baba Avenue, Ambal Nagar 1, Kovur, Chennai - 602122 ...Defendant

¶9

Counsel for Applicant : M/s.K. Radhakrishnamurthy Defendant : Exparte ……

¶10

ORDER

¶11

The Application is filed Under Section 19(1) of the Recovery of Debts

¶12

And Bankruptcy Act,1993 seeking for issuance of a Recovery Certificate for a total sum of Rs. 58,75,669/- due under the Housing Loan A/calong with future interest and costsand for sale of schedule mentioned properties.

¶13

¶14

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

¶15

The Applicant Bank contends thata Housing Loan credit facility of Rs. 22,50,000/- was availed by the Defendant under Subha Gruha Housing scheme for purchase of residential flat. It is also stated that the facilities are secured by mortgageof schedule mentioned properties.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Summons was taken out and as defendant failed to enter appearance, he was set exparte on 20.05.2022.

¶19

The Applicant Bank let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in confirmation with the pleadings and got marked Exhs.A1 to A18.

¶20

Heard. The following issues arise for consideration.

¶21

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

¶22

¶23

ii. What orders are to be passed?

¶24

Both these issues are decided together.

¶25

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. Since the TA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at agreed rate, which is on the higher side, prayer formonthly rests is declined. Interest is awarded at 9% p.a. (simple).

¶26

In view of the above:

¶27

i. TA. No: 941of 2023 stands allowed.

¶28

ii. Applicant Bank is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.58,75,669/-(Rupees Fifty Eight Lakhs Seventy FiveThousand Six Hundred and Sixty NineOnly/-)together with future and pendentelite interest @ 9% p.a. (simple)from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendantand also proceeding against and selling the schedule mentioned properties and appropriate the sale proceeds towards the decretal dues.

¶29

¶30

iii. If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amounts due and payable to the Applicant Bank, the defendant is personally liable for all such amounts due.

¶31

iv. 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 defendant.

¶32

v. 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

vi. 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.

¶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-2, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 8^th day ofMarch, 2024)

¶36

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

¶37

M/s. Indian Overseas Bank v. Mr. C. Rajasekaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Indian Overseas Bank v. Mr. C. Rajasekaran

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 Chakkrapani P

Bank of Baroda versus M/s.Mkr Stores

Bank of Baroda versus Mr R Thulasingam

Canara Bank versus Rajaraman

M/s. Hdfc Bank Limited versus Mohn Singh

Laxmi Vilas Bank versus M/s.Super Agencies