Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
M/s. International Asset Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd vs Mrs. Arun Raghavendar S D on 28 March 2024
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II AT CHENNAI
Dated this 28th day of March, 2024
PRESENT: SHRI T. RAJESH
PRESIDING OFFICER
TA No.726 of 2023
(Originally filed before DRT-I Chennai as OA No.89 of 2021 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.726 of 2023)
M/s. International Asset Reconstruction
Company Pvt. Ltd
Door no.1, 9th floor, Prashanth Real Gold Tower D.No.39, North Usman Road, T Nagar, Chennai - 600017, Rep. by its Authorized Signatory Mrs. G. Sridevisundari
…Applicant
Versus
Mrs. Arun Raghavendar S D,
S/o. Devi Prasad,
Plot No.364, Door No.3/403, TNHB Quarters Sri Raghavendra Swamy Kovil Street, Mambakkam main Road, Sittalapakkam Near HDFC Bank, Chennai-600126
Also at
Sri Raghavendra Family & Mind Care Clinic New No.848, Mount Road, Anna Salai, Saidapet, Chennai-600015
Counsel for the Applicant Bank
Counsel for Defendant
:
:
Mr. T.K.M. Sai Krishnan
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.
FINAL ORDER
1. The Application is filed under Section 19 (1) of the Recovery of Debt And Bankruptcy Act, 1993 seeking for issuance of a Recovery Certificate for Rs.88,30,108.73p due in a car loan availed by the defendant from HDFC Bank Ltd., which was the original lender bank.
2. The above OA was originally filed by HDFC Bank Ltd before DRT-I and got transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as above.
3. It is contended that the defendant approached HDFC Bank Ltd and availed a Car loan for Rs.80,44,953/- for the purchase of a Mercedez Benz Car. It is also stated that the facility is secured by hypothecation over the vehicle having registration number TN11AR8827.
4. It is further contended that despite availing the credit facility by obliging to pay back the amount in 65 equal monthly installments of Rs.1,67,978/- each commencing from 5.11.2019 and ending on 5.3.2025. Even though the defendant was obliged to pay back the amount, he failed in compliance of the same. It is also stated that a legal notice dated 16.11.2020 was also issued demanding the amount due in the account. It is the further case of the applicant that as all the efforts of the Applicant to make the borrowers pay back the amount failed the Applicant is left with no remedy other than to file this Application.
5. Summons was taken out through paper publication and despite taking out summons through paper publication, there was no representation for the defendants, the non appearance was noted on 29.9.2022 and subsequently the defendant was set ex-parte on 6.3.2024.
6. In the mean while the debt was assigned in favour of the present applicant herein, resulting the substitution of the present applicant in place of HDFC Bank Ltd .
7. The Applicant let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in conforming with pleading and got marked Ext A1 to A6.
8. Heard the counsel for the applicant and considered the contention as taken in the TA in the light of documentary evidence and proof affidavit. The following issues arise for consideration in this matter: -
(i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the TA claim.
(ii) What orders are to be passed?
Both these issues are gone into and decided together.
9. The Applicant evidence remained un-rebutted and hence proved. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidence put forth by the applicant were found admissible. From the statement of accounts as produced by the applicant, it is evident that the amount as claimed in the TA is outstanding in the account, which the applicant is entitled to get recovered from the defendant and / his assets. The claim of the applicant is well within the period of limitation and there is no Capitalization of penal interest.
10. The documents produced by the Applicant are found to be admissible and are sufficient to produce TA claim. Hence the Applicant is to be found entitled for the TA claim. The TA claim is made within limitation and there is no capitalization of penal interest.
11. Since the credit facility is admittedly for purchase of vehicle and as the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at agreed rate pendente lite and future interest is awarded at 9% per annum (simple).
12. In view of the above, the following order is passed: - (a) TA No.726 of 2023 stands allowed.
(b) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.88,30,108.73p (Rupees eighty eight lakhs thirty thousand one hundred eight and paise seventy three only) with future and pendente lite interest @ 9% simple per annum from the date of filing of the OA/TA till realization, after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA/TA, from the defendant and also by proceeding against his assets including the hypothecated Car.
(c) A Recovery Certificate is to be drawn and issued to the recovery Officer to enable recovery of the as per the above terms.
(d) Applicant is allowed to realize cost of the proceeding for which cost memo is to be filed in 7 days’ time from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.
13. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 6 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993. (Dictated to PS, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 28th day of March, 2024)
Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, CHENNAI