Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
STATE BANK OF INDIA vs PREMNATH on 29 December 2023
IN THE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL –II CHENNAI
Dated this 29th day of December, 2023
PRESENT: SHRI T.RAJESH
PRESIDING OFFICER
T.A.No.203 of 2023
(Old OA.No.8/2020–DRT-I, Chennai)
State Bank of India,
SARC Wing, RACPC,
16, Whannels Road,
Egmore,
Chennai - 600 008.
…Applicant
Vs.
Shri R.Premnath,
S/o. Shri Late J.Ranganathan,
No.163 & 164, Shri Abhisheka Vally Street, Flats S-1, 2nd Floor, Rangarajapuram Main Road, Kodambakkam, Chennai - 600 024.
Also at
Shri R.Premnath,
S/o. Shri Late J.Ranganathan,
Flat No 301, 3rd Floor, D Sector,
Block No.31, Provident Cosmo City
Dr. Abdulkalam Salai,
Off Vandalur – Kelambakkam Road,
Pudupakkam Village,
Chengalpattu
Kancheepuram District.
Also at
Shri R.Premnath,
S/o. Shri Late J.Ranganathan,
Winsar Info Soft Pvt. Ltd,
No. 66, 1st Floor, Kasturba Nagar,
3rd Main Road, Adyar,
Chennai – 600 020.
... Defendant
Counsel for Applicant
: M/s. S.Ambal Vannan
Defendant
: Exparte
……
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.
ORDER
1. The above Transfer Application is filed under section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act seeking recovery of Rs.23,60,793/- with further interest from the date of filing of the TA and by allowing the same to be recovered from the defendant and also by sale of the schedule mentioned properties.
2. The above original application is filed before the DRT-I and stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as above.
3. The case of the applicant can be encapsulated as follows: The Defendant had approached the applicant and sought for a Housing Loan for purchase of schedule mentioned Flat and land. The defendant availed a Home Loan of Rs. 16,81,000/- and a Term Loan of Rs. 9,28,000/- from the Applicant.
4. It is also stated that the above facilities were availed after execution of necessary loan documents by the defendant obliging himself to repay the amount promptly and regularly, without fail.
5. Apart from execution of the necessary loan documents by the defendant, the defendant had created security by way of equitable mortgage over the schedule mentioned properties.
6. Even though the defendant had obliged himself to repay the amount promptly and regularly, he failed to do so resulting defaults in the account and the same being declared as NPA on 08.02.2019.
7. The applicant’s officials had on many occasions approached the defendant requesting him to regularize the account and despite the same, no effort was made by the defendant to get the account regularized over to pay back the amount. Even as no repayment was made despite repeated requests, the applicant had on 21.03.2019 caused to issue a demand notice requiring the repayment of the amount due in the accounts.
8. It is also the case of the applicant that despite repeated reminders and requests, the defendant had failed to make the repayment forcing the applicant to file this TA seeking recovery of the amount due in the accounts with further interest and cost.
9. Even as the defendant failed to enter appearance, he was set exparte on 03.06.2022.
10. The applicant had let in evidence through AW1 who had sworn to a Proof Affidavit in terms of the pleadings in the TA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A16 and got the same marked in evidence.
11. Heard the counsel for the applicant and considered the contentions 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.
12. The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant remains exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences 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 accounts, which the applicant is entitled to get recovered from the defendant and his assets (including the scheduled mentioned properties). The claim of the applicant is well within the period of limitation and there is no Capitalization of penal interest.
13. In view of the finding as entered above: i) TA No.203 of 2023 stands allowed. ii) Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.23,60,793/-(Rupees Twenty Three Lakhs Sixty Thousands Seven Hundred Ninety Three only) future and pendentelite interest @16% p.a. from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendant after giving credit to all the amounts recovered and received during the pendency of the TA. iii) The schedule properties to be proceeded against and sold and if the sale proceeds are not sufficient the defendant and his other assets are liable to be proceeded against. iv) A Recovery Certificate is to be drawn and issued to the recovery officer to enable recovery of the amount as per the above terms.
v) Applicant is allowed to realize cost of the proceedings for which cost memo is to be filed in 7 days’ time from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.
14. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Section 19(21)(i) of the RDB Act, read with Rule 16 of DRT (Procedure) Rules, 1993. (Dictated to PA, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 29th day of December, 2023)
Sd./- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, CHENNAI