Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK vs NILESH BABI TATE on 18 March 2024
Registered on:20.01.2016
Decided on: 18.03.2024
IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT MUMBAI
TRANSFER ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1119 of 2016
(OA No. 56/2016 is Transferred from DRT-III, Mumbai &
Registered as TOA No. 1119/2016)
INDIAN
OVERSEAS
BANK
A
body
corporate
constituted
under
Banking
Companies
(Acquisition
and
Transfer
of
Undertakings) Act, 1970, and having its
Central Office at 763, Anna Salai, Chennai, Tamilnadu andone of its Branches at Shop No.1,2 & 3, Ground Floor, Trimurti Bhavan, Mapusa-Calangute Road, Canca-Parra Road, Verla -Canca, Goa-403510
…. APPLICANT
VERSUS
MR. NILESH BABI TATE, son of Babi Tate,
major of age, Married, businessman, Indian National, R/o, H. No.44/B, Dhangarwada, Bicholim-Goa 403504
… DEFENDANT
_____________________________________________
Counsel for the Applicant :
Advocate Kalyani Wagle i/b T. N.
Tripathi & Co.
Counsel for the Defendant :
Ex-parte
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
J U D G M E N T
1. The Original Application has been filed by the Applicant against the Defendant before Ld. DRT-III, Mumbai, which stands transferred to this Tribunal as per the Govt. Notification dated 26/09/2016
and registered as TA No. 1119/2016. The OA has been filed by the Applicant for recovery of Rs. 11,86,078/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh Eighty Six Thousand and Seventy Eight Only) with further interest at the contractual rate of interest of @ 12.25 % + 2 % penal per annum with monthly rest from 01.02.2015 till payment and or realisation.
2. Facts as succinctly set out in the present OA are that the Defendant approached the Applicant in February 2013 for the grant of a Term Loan facility for the purchase of Commercial Transport Vehicle of Ashok Leyland Limited make and after considering the application for grant of term loan facilities, the Applicant Bank sanctioned the said facility vide sanction letter dated 26.02.2013 and hypothecated the said vehicle as security.
3. It is stated that Defendant is constituent of the Applicant Bank since the year 2013. The Defendant is in the business of Transport. At the request of the Defendant, the Applicant bank vide sanction letter dated 26.02.2013 sanctioned and granted term loan facility of Rs. 11,20,000/-.
4. In consideration of sanction of aforesaid term loan facility, Defendant executed following loaning and security documents on 26.02.2013 i. Demand Promissory Note ii. Deed of Hypothecation along with consent cum authorization letter iii. Declaration from the Defendant
5. In order to further secure the aforesaid facility, the Defendant created hypothecation over the said vehicle and the Defendant also executed necessary documents in favour of the Applicant.
6. However, after availing aforesaid facility, Defendant committed defaults of his obligations under various agreements and failed and neglected to repay the outstanding dues. Thus, the Applicant issued various reminder letter dated 29.10.2013; 20.11.2013; 13.02.2014; 10.03.2014; 07.05.2014; 09.06.2014; 01.07.2014; 25.07.2015 & 20.10.2014. Thereafter, the Applicant through their advocates issued legal notice vide notice dated 24.11.2014 and called upon the Defendant to pay the outstanding dues, but failed to do so. Hence, the present OA has been filed.
7. Notices were issued to the Defendant. Despite service, none appeared on behalf of the Defendant nor any WS has been filed, thus he was proceeded ex-parte vide order dated 13.03.2024.
8. The Applicant Bank has produced all the loaning and security documents as (Exhibit A/1 to Exhibit A/12 of List of Documents) such as respective loan application; Deed of Hypothecation; recall notice; statement of account; particular of claim.
9. I have heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank and perused the record.
10. The Applicant Bank has fully corroborated the averments made in the OA, even otherwise the whole case of the Applicant Bank is based on documents as (Exhibit A/1 to Exhibit A/12 of list of documents) and the Applicant Bank has duly proved all these documents as against the Defendant.
11. In the light of above discussions, the Original Application filed by the Applicant Bank deserves to be allowed against the Defendant.
12. The Applicant claiming penal interest @ 2% p.a. with respect of term loan facility, however, the same is hereby declined.
O R D E R
(i) I allow the present O.A. and direct the Defendant to pay to the Applicant, within a period of 60 days, a sum of Rs. 11,86,078/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh Eighty Six Thousand Seventy Eight Only) with further interest at the contractual rate of interest of @ 12.25 % per annum with monthly rest from 01.02.2015 till payment and or realisation.
(ii) Failing which the aforesaid amount shall be recovered from the sale of the hypothecated assets, personal moveable and immoveable assets of the Defendant.
(iii) Defendant is hereby directed not to deal with their properties till further direction of Ld. Recovery Officer.
(iv) Defendant shall also pay the cost and expenses of the OA.
(v) Recovery Certificate be issued forthwith and be sent to the Recovery Officer of this Tribunal. Copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to record.
Place: Mumbai.
(Dr. Rekha G. Dhakar) Date : 18.03.2024
Presiding Officer, DRT-1, Mumbai.
Tjs/-