CANARA BANK vs M/s. Vishnu Technologies on 27 March 2024

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. 39,31,921.21 (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Thirty One Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty One and Twenty One paisa only) due in the credit facility of Secured Over Draft availed by 1st the defendant.

2. The above TA was originally filed before DRT-I and got transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as above.

3. The Applicant contends that a credit facility of Rs. 26,00,000/- was availed by the defendant a proprietary concern, represented by the 2nd respondent; its proprietor and the 3rd stood as guarantor. It is also stated that the facility is secured by mortgage of schedule properties belonged to the 3rd defendant.

4. The Applicant further contends that despite availing the credit facility by obliging to pay back the amount, the defendants failed in compliance of the same and all the efforts of the Applicant to make the defendants pay back the amount including issuance of a demand notice dated 8.10.2018 failed forcing the Applicant to file this Application.

5. Summons was taken out and as the defendant filed their reply statement admitting the availment of the credit facility but at the same time contending that they were made to sign blank papers when availing the facility. The interest as claimed in the TA is also disputed by the defendant.

6. The Applicant let in evidence through AW1, filed proof affidavit in conforming with pleading and got marked Ext A1 to A21. Though sufficient opportunity was given, no counter proof affidavit was filed by the defendants.

7. Heard, the following issues arise for consideration: - (a) Whether the Applicant had proved the OA claim?

(b) What orders are to be passed? Both these issues are decided together.

8. The Applicant evidence remains un-rebutted and hence proved. The documents produced by the Applicant are found to be admissible and are sufficient to prove TA claim. The defendants though filed a reply statement, the availment of credit facility is admitted. More over no defense evidence was let in support of the denial. Hence the Applicant is to be found entitled for the OA claim. The OA claim is made within limitation and there is no capitalization of penal interest. Since the TA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at agreed rate, which though is on the higher side is not interfered with, pendente lite and future interest is awarded at a simple rate that too at reduced interest rate of 12% per annum simple.

9. In view of the above, the following order is passed: - (a) TA No.363 of 2022 stands allowed.

(b) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.39,31,921.21p (Rupees Thirty Nine Lakhs Thirty One Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty One and Twenty One paisa only) with future and pendente ltte interest @ 12% per annum (simple) from the date of filing of the OA/TA till realization from the defendants jointly, severally and personally against defendants 2 and 3 and also by sale of the assets of the defendants including the sale of scheduled mentioned property after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA/TA.

(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.

10. 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 the Open court, this the 27th day of March, 2024) Sd/-

(T.RAJESH)

PRESIDING OFFICER

DRT-II, CHENNAI