Allowed

Indian Bank v. Sreekanth K

DRT4 Feb 2025OA/93/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DRT-III, Chennai allowed an original application filed by Indian Bank for recovery of a housing loan of Rs.33,75,481. The defendants were adjudged ex-parte due to non-appearance. The Tribunal permitted recovery from personal assets if mortgaged property proceeds were insufficient and directed issuance of a recovery certificate.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs.33,75,481 with interest @10.20% p.a., liberty to sell mortgaged property and personal assets if sale proceeds are insufficient, and issuance of recovery certificate.

Indian Bank versus Sreekanth K — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

OA No.93/2022 (E)

¶2

04.02.2025

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 04^th day of February, 2025

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer

¶7

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 93 of 2022

¶8

M/s. Indian Bank, Venkatapuram Branch, Ambattur, Chennai, Rep by its Senior Manager

¶9

….Applicant

¶10

-Vs-

¶11

Mr. K. Sreekanth S/o. Krishnan No. 13A/7, Anandan Street, Thiruvalluvar Nagar, Pammal, Chennai – 600 075.

¶12

Mrs. K. Sowmya, W/o. K. Sreekanth, No. 13A/7, Anandan Street, Thiruvalluvar Nagar, Pammal, Chennai – 600 075.

¶13

Mr. R. Rajkumar, S/o. Mr.Rajasekar, No. 3/36, Rajan Nagar, Kelambakkam, Chennai. ….Defendants

¶14

Counsels on record / appeared:

¶15

Counsel for Applicant Bank : M/s. P V Murlidhar

¶16

Defendants 1to 3 were set ex-parte on18.08.2022

¶17

OA No.93/2022 (E)

¶18

¶19

04.02.2025

¶20

: - FINAL ORDER - :

¶21

This original application is filed on 21.12.2016 by the applicant bank under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993) against the defendants for recovery of a total sum of Rs.33,75,481/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand Four Hundred and Eighty One Only) due in respect of Housing Loan (HL) facility (Housing Loan Account No.6186442636) together with interest therein @ 10.20% per annum with monthly rests from the date of application till the date of realization in full from the defendants jointly and severally, and for sale of mortgaged property morefully detailed in schedule to the OA, and for costs of this application.

¶22

Brief Facts of the case:

¶23

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.

¶24

The case of the applicant bank is that theDefendants 1 & 2 (Co-borrower) approached the Applicant Bank seeking for Housing Loan towards purchase of Flat (property details mentioned in the schedule), vide loan application dated 23.12.2013.

¶25

OA No.93/2022 (E)

¶26

¶27

04.02.2025

¶28

It is submitted that upon request of Defendants 1 & 2 and on the guarantee of 3^rd defendant, the applicant bank had sanctioned Home Loan facility of Rs.27,50,000/- vide sanction ticket dated 23.12.2013, which is repayable together with interest at the rate of 10.20% p.a. with monthly rests.

¶29

It is submitted by applicant bank that defendants availed the said facility and executed loan and security documents in favour of applicant bank on 23.12.2013:

¶30

(i) Sanction Ticket to the Defendants 1 & 2.

¶31

(ii) Demand Promissory Note for Rs. 27.5 Lakhs.

¶32

(iii) Term Loan Agreement for Housing Finance

¶33

(iv) Agreement of Guarantee by 3^rd Defendant.

¶34

(v) Register of Equitable Mortgage dated 01.02.2014.

¶35

(vi) Sale Deed - Doc No. 15373/2013, SRO, Ambattur in favour of 1^st Defendant dated 26.12.2013.

¶36

(vii) Statement of Account along with BBE.

¶37

The Applicant submits that as security for the said facility, the 1^st Defendant deposited the title deeds pertaining to his property morefully described in the Schedule to this OA on 01.02.2014 with an intent to create equitable mortgage with the Applicant Bank and confirmed the same as per the Register of Mortgage maintained by the Applicant Bank dt.01.12.2014. The property mortgaged was duly acquired by the 1^st Defendant by a Sale Deed dt. 26.12.2013 vide Doc. No.15373/2013, SRO, Ambattur as well as Construction

¶38

OA No.93/2022 (E)

¶39

04.02.2025

¶40

¶41

Agreement dt.: 02.12.2013 with M/s. Sri Hari Promoters and Developers.

¶42

It is submitted by Applicant Bank that after availing the said facility, the defendants deliberately failed to repay the loan amount availed, inspite of repeated demands and reminders by Applicant Bank. As defendants miserably failed to make repayments in the aforesaid loan account, the applicant bank classified the aforesaid loan account as NPA (Non-Performing Assets) on 31.12.2014. As defendants did not come forward to make any payment, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the defendants.

¶43

After the filing of the OA, summons were sent to the Defendants 1 to 3 through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, which was returned unserved with postal endorsement as ‘No Such Person’. Applicant bank had caused paper publication of the notice and filed proof thereof. When OA was taken up on 18.08.2022 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, defendants 1 to 3 were placed ex-parte on 18.08.2022.

¶44

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶45

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Shri. Ambuj Kumar Rai, Branch Manager of 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-8 . As the defendants remained ex-parte, the OA claim remains unchallenged. There is no contra evidence available on record to

¶46

OA No.93/2022 (E)

¶47

04.02.2025

¶48

¶49

repudiate the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶50

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:

¶51

: O R D E R:

¶52

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶53

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from Defendants Nos.1 to 3 jointly, severally a sum of Rs.33,75,481/- (Rupees Thirty Three Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand Four Hundred and Eighty One only) due in respect of Housing Loan (HL) facility (Housing Loan Account No.6186442636) together with interest therein @ 10.20% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing this application till the date of realization;

¶54

(b) In the event of failure of the defendants to pay the aforesaid amount, the bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of the schedule mentioned immovable property morefully detailed in the OA;

¶55

¶56

(d) If the sale proceeds of the schedule mentioned mortgaged properties are not sufficient to satisfy the dues as ordered above, the applicant bank is at liberty to sell the personal assets of the defendants (both movable and immovable) to recover the balance dues as required under law;

¶57

OA No.93/2022 (E)

¶58

04.02.2025

¶59

¶60

(e) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the defendants duly considering the amounts, if any, paid by the defendants 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 defendants to the applicant bank.

¶61

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

¶62

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

¶63

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

¶64

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

¶65

(Dictated to Steno (Sudhakar), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 04^th day of February, 2025)

¶66

OA No.93/2022 (E)

04.02.2025

ANNEXURES

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶71

AW-1: Shri.Ambuj Kumar Rai, Branch Manager of the Applicant Bank.

¶72

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶73

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	Application Formdated23.12.2013	A-1
2.	Sanction Ticket to the Defendants 1 & 2 dated 23.12.2013	A-2
3.	Demand Promissory Note for Rs. 27.5 Lakhs by Defendants1&2toApplicant dated23.12.2013	A-3
4.	Term Loan Agreement for Housing Finance by Defendants1&2toApplicant dated23.12.2013	A-4
5.	Agreement of Guarantee by 3^rdDefendant to Applicant dated23.12.2013	A-5
6.	Register of Equitable Mortgage dated 01.02.2014	A-6
7.	Sale Deed - Doc No. 15373/2013, SRO, Ambattur in favourof 1^stDefendant dated26.12.2013	A-7
8.	Statement of Account alongwith BBEcertificates	A-8

¶74

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶75

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil -

¶76

:Schedule:

¶77

All that piece and parcel of Flat No. F in the First Floor with a super built up area of about 850 Sq.ft. or thereabouts (including common area), at Old Door No.5, New Door No. 7, Mettu Street, Thirumullaivoyal Colony, Thirumullaivoyal, Chennai – 600 062, together with 400 sq.ft., undivided share of land in 1368 sq.ft., or thereabouts comprised in Grama Natham Survey No. 304/1 part Block No. 7, T.S. No.35, of No. 15, Thirumullaivoyal Village, Ambattur Taluk, Thiruvallur District, within the limits of Avadi

¶78

Municipality and bounded on the North by: Land belongs to Mrs. B. Vijayakumari; South by: 5 Feet Passage and land and house belongs to Mr. Nagamani; East by: 30 Feet Road (Mettu Street) and West by: Land belongs to Vijayakumari within the Sub Registration District of Ambattur and Registration District of North Chennai.

¶79

Sd/-

¶80

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

Indian Bank v. Sreekanth K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Bank v. Sreekanth K

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 Mohana

Union Bank of India versus Sun Blue Metal

Union Bank of India versus Sun Blue Metal

Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited versus Jeganlingam

Sree Maaselha Enterprises versus Bank of India

M Sivakumar versus Bank of India