Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Sanjeevappa

DRT26 Aug 2025OA/727/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank's application for recovery of an agricultural term loan principal of Rs. 40,01,578. Following an ex-parte hearing, the court confirmed the loan documents were proved and awarded simple interest at 6% p.a., clarifying that penal interest cannot be capitalized.

What did the court decide?

Order directed repayment of Rs. 40,01,578 plus 6% simple interest, authorized sale of mortgaged properties for deficiency, and directed filing of cost memo for Recovery Certificate.

Punjab National Bank versus Sanjeevappa — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

OA No. 881/2015

¶2

Fair Order

¶3

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AT MADURAI DATED THIS 26^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT: SEEMA SINHA,

¶4

[PR. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE – Retd] PRESIDING OFFICER

¶5

OA No.727/2022

¶6

Between

¶7

Punjab National Bank, Circle SASTRA Trichy, Circle Office, Kailasapuram, Trichy – 620 014. Rep. By its Chief Manager.

¶8

---Applicant Bank

¶9

And

¶10

Mr. Sanjeevappa,

¶11

S/o Chinna Chenarayappa,

¶12

No.470, Bennikal,

¶13

Sanamavu, Hosur,

¶14

Krishnagiri – 635 119

¶15

Mr. Ramesh ,

¶16

S/o Chinna Chenarayappa,

¶17

No.470, Bennikal,

¶18

Sanamavu, Hosur,

¶19

Krishnagiri – 635 119

¶20

Mr. Manjunath,

¶21

S/o Chinna Chenarayappa, No.470, Bennikal, Sanamavu, Hosur,

¶22

Krishnagiri – 635 119

¶23

Page 1 of 6

¶24

OA No. 881/2015

¶25

Mrs. Yasotha, W/o Manjunath, No.470, Bennikal, Sanamavu, Hosur, Krishnagiri – 635 119 ---Defendants

¶26

Counsel for the Applicant Bank : M/s S. Balasubramanian

¶27

This Original Application was heard and fixed for passing final order before me in the presence of the above said Advocate for Applicant Bank and the Defendants having been set ex-parte and upon hearing the arguments of Counsel for Applicant Bank and upon perusing the material available on the records and having stood over for consideration till this day, this Tribunal delivered the following:

¶28

JUDGEMENT

¶29

1 . This Application has been filed under Sec.19 (1) of the "The Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993" now amended as The Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 by the Applicant Bank on 03.10.2022 to recover from the Defendants a sum of Rs.40,01,578/together with interest at the rate of 12.50% p.a. with penal interest at the rate of 2%p.a. at monthly rests in respect of Agricultural Term Loan from the date of filing of Application till the date of realization with cost and by sale of mortgaged/hypothecated properties, more fully described in Schedules of the application.

¶30

2 . The brief averments of the application filed by the Applicant Bank are as follows:-

¶31

The defendants availed Agricultural Term Loan for a sum of Rs.40,00,000/-. The defendants executed necessary loan documents in favour of the Applicant Bank. The defendants had also deposited the original Title deeds of immovable property with the applicant bank as security for the due repayment of loan availed by them. The defendants executed Memorandum of deposit of Title deeds on 23.09.15 as Doc.No.6042/2015, SRO Kelamangalam. Further, Defendants agreed to repay the loan together with interest at the rate of 12.50% p.a. plus penal interest at the rate of 2%p.a. together with costs and charges. Further, defendants also agreed to pay interest as and when it is changed from time to time by the Applicant Bank. The 1^st defendant had executed balance of security confirmation on 16.05.2017 and 14.05.2020 thereby acknowledged their liability. After availing the loan, defendants were not regular in the matter of repayment. The defendants made several promises, but they failed

¶32

Page 2 of 6

¶33

OA No. 881/2015

¶34

to keep up their promises. Thus the loan account became Non Performing Asset. Hence the applicant bank issued demand notice dated 23.12.2021.

¶35

Despite repeated demands and reminders, made by the Applicant Bank, the Defendants have failed and neglected to repay and adjust their liability. Hence, the Applicant Bank has filed the OA for recovery of a sum of Rs.40,01,578/- together with interest at the rate of 12.50% p.a. with penal interest at the rate of 2%p.a. at monthly rests in respect of Agricultural Term Loan from the date of filing of Application till the date of realization with cost.

¶36

The Applicant Bank has submitted the following documents in support its claim in the OA, which are as follows:

¶37

S. No.	Date	Description of document	Exhibits
1.	06.08.2015	Loan Application	Ex.No.A-01
2.	31.03.2015	Sanction Letter	Ex.No.A-02
3.	14.10.2015	Hypothecation Agreement	Ex.No.A-03
4.	14.10.2015	Deed of Guarantee	Ex.No.A-04
5.	23.09.2015	MOD in Doc.No.6042/2015	Ex.No.A-05
6.	----	Statement of Accounts	Ex.No.A-06

¶38

SCHEDULE OF PROPERTY Mortgaged Property

¶39

In Bairamangalam village of Denkanikottai Taluk attached to Kelamangalam Sub Registration District and Krishnagiri Registration District and also attached to the village Panchayat limits of Bairamangalam and union council of Kelamangalam.

¶40

BAIRAMANGALAM VILLAGE:

¶41

Survey Number: 388/2, Dry.Ext.Hec.0.20.0 (or) Ac.0.49 Cents, Asst.Rs.1.14 np, Full Extent

¶42

Survey Number: 388/B3B, Dry.Ext.Hec.0.03.5 (or) Ac.0.09 Cents, Asst.Rs.0.15 np, Full Extent

¶43

Survey Number: 385/1, Dry.Ext.Hec.0.56.0 (or) Ac.1.38 Cents, Asst.Rs.2.78 np, Full Extent

¶44

1. Survey Number: 378/3B1, Dry.Ext.Hec.0.08.0 (or) Ac.0.20 Cents, Asst.Rs.0.40 np, Full Extent

¶45

Page 3 of 6

¶46

OA No. 881/2015

¶47

Altogether Survey Numbers making a Total Extent of Ac.2.16 cents.

¶48

3 . On the other hand, Notices were issued to Defendants and since from the beginning of the case, there was no representation on behalf of the Defendants. Hence, Defendants were set ex-parte.

¶49

4. Now the main point for consideration before me is as to whether the Applicant has been able to prove his case on his own leg?

¶50

Having gone through the affidavit of the applicant and the documents filed by them and also considering the submission of the counsel for the Applicant, I find that the Applicant Bank, in order to prove its claim, has filed Proof Affidavit executed by one Mr. Manjunath Venkatagiri, who is the Chief Manager of the Applicant Bank.

¶51

He has stated in his affidavit that the defendants has availed Medium Term Loan from the Applicant Bank, but they failed to pay the outstanding loan amount, hence he has filed the case. The applicant bank has also filed the documents given by the defendants at the time of sanctioning the loan amount, which have been marked as exhibits No.A-01 to A-06 in support of its claim in the OA.

¶52

The Loan Application has been marked as Ex.No.A-01, Sanction Letter has been marked as Ex.No.A-02, Hypothecation Agreement has been marked as Ex.No.A-03, Deed of Guarantee has been marked as Ex.No.A-04, MOD in Doc.No.6042/2015 has been marked as Ex.No.A-05, Statement of Accounts has been marked as Ex.No.A-06. So the averments of the applicant as well as the statement of the pleading have been corroborated by the above mentioned documents.

¶53

As the Defendants remained ex-parte, the claim of the Applicant Bank is neither disproved nor dislodged and goes on record as proved. Accordingly a cumulative analysis of both the Proof Affidavit and documents marked by the Applicant Bank would prove the claim of the Applicant Bank in the OA.

¶54

So far the claim of interest is concerned, it is a well settled Law that the Tribunal has got powers to award pendente lite interest in view of the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in N.M. Veerapa Vs Canara Bank (reported in AIR 98(1), 1101 & in Central bank of India Vs Ravindra and OS (AIR, 2001(1), 3095).

¶55

So far the penal interest is concerned Hon'ble supreme court stated in the said judgement as followed " Though interest can be capitalised on the anology that the interest falling due on the accrued date and remaining

¶56

Page 4 of 6

¶57

OA No. 881/2015

¶58

unpaid, partakes the character of amount advanced on that date, yet penal interest, which is charged by way of penalty for non payment, cannot be capitalized. Further interest, i.e interest on interest, whether simple, compound or penal, cannot be claimed on the amount of penal interest. Penal interest cannot be capitalized. It will be opposed to public policy ".

¶59

Therefore, this Original Application is allowed. The Applicant Bank is entitled for a final order on the following lines:-

¶60

The Applicant Bank is entitled to recover from the Defendants, a sum of Rs.40,01,578/- together with simple interest at the rate of 6% p.a. in respect of Agricultural Term Loan from the date of filing of Application till the date of realization with cost. Accordingly, it is hereby

¶61

ORDERED

¶62

(a) That the Defendants are directed to pay jointly/severally a sum of Rs.40,01,578/- together with simple interest at the rate of 6% p.a. in respect of Agricultural Term Loan from the date of filing of Application till the date of realization with cost within one month from the date of receipt of this order.

¶63

(b) In case of default of payment by the above mentioned Defendants, the Applicant Bank is at liberty to sell the movable / immovable properties more fully described in Schedule of the original application for appropriation of sale proceeds towards the satisfaction of amount due to the Applicant Bank.

¶64

(c) If the sale proceeds are not sufficient, after defraying the expenses of such sale, for the payment of all such amounts, the defendants are jointly/severally liable to pay the amount of such deficiency with interest mentioned above until realization.

¶65

(d) Any amount remitted during the course of this proceedings shall be given due credit, to the loan account of the defendants.

¶66

Page 5 of 6

¶67

OA No. 881/2015

¶68

(e) Recovery Certificate be prepared, as per the directions given above, and issue accordingly. A copy of the order is to be communicated to the parties concerned, immediately.

¶69

(f) It is further ordered that the Applicant Bank shall file cost memo within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, so as to prepare the recovery certificate with cost for the Agricultural Term loan and the Recovery Officer is also directed to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. In case, cost memo is not filed before said period of one month, Recovery Certificate will be prepared with available records.

¶70

Dictated to T.P, taken down, transcribed, typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Court in this the 26^th August, 2025.

¶71

Sd/- (SEEMA SINHA) PRESIDING OFFICER

¶72

Uploaded on 16.09.2025

¶73

Page 6 of 6

Punjab National Bank v. Sanjeevappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Sanjeevappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Punjab National Bank versus M/s. J.P Flour Mill Industries

S Alexander versus City Union Bank Limited

Sathya Pradeep S R versus Canara Bank

Indian Overseas Bank versus M Mohamed Shafi

Punjab National Bank versus S Vijayalakshmi

M R Mohandoss versus State Bank of India