Allowed

Canara Bank v. Prabhakaran

DRT21 Apr 2025OA/149/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this debt recovery application, Canara Bank sought recovery of approximately Rs. 71 lakhs along with interest from a borrower who defaulted on an agricultural term loan. The court, hearing the application ex-parte due to the defendant's absence, allowed the claim and authorized recovery from the mortgaged property.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 71,42,413/- along with further interest @ 14.20% p.a. and costs; liberty to sell mortgaged property.

Canara Bank versus Prabhakaran — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

O.A. No. 149 of 2022

¶2

21.04.2025

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 21^st day of April, 2025

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 149 of 2022

¶8

Canara Bank Karanodai Branch No.3/104, G.N.T. Road, Karanodai, Chennai – 600 067 Represented by its Branch Manager ….Applicant

¶9

-Vs-

¶10

Mr. G. Prabhakaran S/o. Late Govinda Naidu, Kaniyambakkam Village, Devathanam Post, Ponneri Taluk Thiruvallur District Chennai – 601 203 …..Defendant

¶11

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶12

Counsel for Applicant : Mr. S. Parthasarathy

¶13

Defendant set ex-parte on 26.07.2022

¶14

: - FINAL ORDER - :

¶15

This original application is filed on 17.03.2022 by the Applicant Bank

¶16

under Section 19 (1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993) against the Defendant for recovery of a total sum of Rs.71,42,413/- (Rupees Seventy One Lakhs Forty Two Thousand Four Hundred & Thirteen Only) due in respect of Agricultural Term

¶17

O.A. No. 149 of 2022

¶18

¶19

21.04.2025

¶20

Loan ( A/c No.1492856000009), together with further interest @ 14.20%, p.a. with quarterly rests from the date of filing the OA, till date of realization in full from the Defendant and for sale of mortgaged property morefully detailed in Schedule to the OA, and for costs of this application;

¶21

Brief Facts of the case:

¶22

The Applicant submits that the application is filed within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 24 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Tribunal.

¶23

It is the case of the Applicant Bank that the Defendant approached the Applicant Bank on 11.06.2009 for sanction of Agricultural Term Loan for the purchase of Combined Harvester for the purpose of Paddy cultivation.

¶24

It is submitted that the Applicant Bank, considering the request of the Defendant, had sanctioned Term Loan of Rs.17,00,000/- on 11.06.2009 in Loan Account No. 1492856000009 with repayment terms of 9 yearly installments at the rate of interest at 14.20% p.a., with the terms of entire loan has to be repaid within 108 months as revised by the Applicant from time to time.

¶25

The Applicant Bank submits that the Defendant offered his

¶26

O.A. No. 149 of 2022

¶27

¶28

21.04.2025

¶29

agricultural land measuring Acres 5.20 cents as collateral security by way of Deposit of Title Deeds registered as Document No.7585 of 2009 dated 03.12.2009 with an intention to create mortgage against his property situated at No.98, Nalur Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District as detailed below.

¶30

Item No.	Survey No.	Hectares	Acres	Document No.
1	388/2	0.24.5	0.60	1584 of 2007
2	389/4	0.71.5	1.77	1584 of 2007
3	389/5	0.32.5	0.79	1584 of 2007
		Total	3.16
4	389/1	0.43.5	1.08	1418 of 2007
5	389/2	0.39.0	0.96	1418 of 2007
		Total	2.04

¶31

The above said land measuring details of registrations are

¶32

mentioned in the schedule to OA.

¶33

It is submitted that the Defendant had executed the Memorandum of Agreement for Agricultural Loans for Rs.17.00 Lakhs in favour of the Applicant. As the Defendant defaulted in repayment of loan amount, Defendant has made a request on 21.02.2018 to the Applicant seeking time for repayment not to proceed against him legally and the loan will be repaid within 6 months. The defendant has executed an acknowledgement of debt and Security on various dates admitting his liability as detailed

¶34

O.A. No. 149 of 2022

21.04.2025

below:

03.12.2012	Rs.20,88,103	O/s as on 05.12.2015
01.12.2015	Rs.31,61,542	O/s as on 01.10.2015
26.10.2017	Rs.42,92,131	O/s as on 01.10.2017
13.05.2020	Rs.61,05,077	O/s as on 13.05.2020

¶39

It is submitted by Applicant Bank that after availing the said facility, the Defendant deliberately failed to repay the loan amount availed in spite of repeated demands and reminders by Applicant Bank. As Defendant miserably failed to make repayments in the aforesaid loan account, the applicant bank classified the aforesaid loan account as NPA (NonPerforming Assets) on 30.09.2021, as per the guidelines issued by the RBI. The Applicant has sent the legal notice sent to the Defendant on 19.01.2022 to repay the outstanding amount. Hence, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the defendant.

¶40

After the filing of the OA, Summon to Sole Defendant sent through Registered Post with Acknowledgement Due, returned unserved with postal endorsement ‘unclaimed’. When OA was taken up on 26.07.2022 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendant. Hence, Defendant were placed exparte on 26.07.2022.

¶41

O.A. No. 149 of 2022

¶42

21.04.2025

¶43

¶44

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶45

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Ms. H.M. Neela Lochini, Branch Manager representing the Applicant Bank, has filed his Affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW-1 and list of documents came to be marked as Ex A-1 to A-10 . As the Defendant remained ex-parte, the OA claim remains unchallenged. There is no contra evidence available on record to repudiate the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶46

With regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied, the conduct and operations in the account and the default committed, this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled for a final order on the following terms:

¶47

: O R D E R :

¶48

11. The OA is allowed with costs,

¶49

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendant sum of total sum of Rs.71,42,413/- (Rupees Seventy One Lakhs Forty Two Thousand Four Hundred & Thirteen Only) due in respect of Agricultural Term Loan (A/c No.1492856000009), together with further interest @ 14.20%, p.a. with quarterly rests from the date of filing the OA, till date of realization in full along with costs of this application;

¶50

(b) In the event of failure of the Defendant to pay the aforesaid

¶51

O.A. No. 149 of 2022

¶52

21.04.2025

¶53

¶54

amount, the bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of mortgaged property morefully detailed in Schedule to the OA.

¶55

¶56

(d) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the Defendant duly considering the amounts, if any, paid by the Defendant and/or amount realized by sale of assets etc., during the intervening period after the filing of the OA, enabling the Registry to prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by Defendant to the applicant bank.

¶57

(e) The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the date of this final order.

¶58

(f) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

¶59

A copy of this order be communicated to the party concerned.

¶60

Sd/(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

¶61

(Dictated to Steno (Sudhakar), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 21^st day of April, 2025)

¶62

O.A. No. 149 of 2022

21.04.2025

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶67

AW-1: Ms. H.M. Neela Lochini, Branch Manager representing the Applicant Bank.

¶68

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶69

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	Sanction for Rs.17.00 Lakhs dated 11.06.2009	A-1
2.	Memorandum of Agreement for Agricultural Loan dated 05.12.2009	A-2
3.	Acknowledgement of Liability dated 03.12.2012	A-3
4.	Acknowledgement of Liability dated 02.12.2015	A-4
5.	Acknowledgement of Liability dated 26.10.2017	A-5
6.	Acknowledgement of Liability dated 13.05.2020	A-6
7.	Sale Deed in Document No.1584 of 2007 dated 05.02.2007	A-7
8.	Sale Deed in Document No.1412 of 2007 dated 12.02.2007	A-8
9.	Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds executed by the Defendant in Document No.7585 of 2009 in favour of Applicant dated 03.12.2009	A-9
10.	Statement of Account along with Certificate under BBE Act in Loan Account No.1492856000009	A-10

¶70

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶71

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶72

O.A. No. 149 of 2022

21.04.2025

SCHEDULE

Schedule of Immovable Property

¶77

As per schedule mentioned in Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds Registered as Document No.7585 of 2009, dated 03.12.2009.

¶78

Item	Survey No.	Hectares	Acres	Document No.
No.
1	388/2	0.24.5	0.60	1584 of 2007
2	389/4	0.71.5	1.77	1584 of 2007
3	389/5	0.32.5	0.79	1584 of 2007
		Total	3.16
4	389/1	0.43.5	1.08	1418 of 2007
5	389/2	0.39.0	0.96	1418 of 2007
		Total	2.04

¶79

The land measuring an extent of Acres 3.16 Cents comprised in Survey Nos.388/2, 389/4 and 389/5 situated at No.98, Nalur Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District was purchased by the Defendant in and by a Sale Deed, dated 05.02.2007 registered as Document No.1584 of 2007 on the file of office of SRO, Ponneri.

¶80

The land measuring an extent of Acres 2.04 Cents comprised in Survey No.389/1, and 389/2 situated at No.98, Nalur-II Group, Akkarambedu Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District was purchased by the Defendant in and by a Sale Deed, Dated 05.02.2007 registered as Document No.1584 of 2007 on the file of Office of SRO, Ponneri.

¶81

Sd/(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

Canara Bank v. Prabhakaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank v. Prabhakaran

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

Indian Bank versus Southern Enterprises

The Branch Manager versus Ms Forte Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Indian Bank versus Southern Enterprises

State Bank of India versus Sambath

Uco Bank versus M/S Muthu Engineering Agencies

Indian Bank versus Ss Paper Crafts