PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK vs Keren Earth Movers on 29 December 2023

FINAL ORDER

1. This application is filed by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.35,06,181/- together with interest at the rate of 12.75% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of the application till the date of realization in full along with costs of this application.

2. The above Original Application is filed before DRT-I Chennai and stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as above.

3. The case of the applicant can be encapsulated as follows: - The applicant, at the request of the defendant vide its sanction letter dated 19.04.2012 sanctioned Cash Credit Facility of Rs.20,00,000/- to the defendant and the defendant executed necessary loan and security documents on the same day. At the request of the defendant the limit was renewed by the applicant vide sanction letter dated 15.07.2013 and again on 15.01.2015. Subsequently, the facility was enhanced to Rs.33,00,000/- vide sanction letter of the applicant dated 1.3.2016. The defendant to secure the said limit executed loan and security documents. The defendant committed default and failed to regularize the loan account despite repeated demands.

4. It is further stated that even though the defendant had obliged to repay the amount promptly and regularly, but failed to do so resulting in default in repayment and hence the account was classified as NPA.

5. It is contended by the applicant that the applicant’s officials had on many occasions approached the defendant requesting them to regularize the account and despite the same no effort was made by the defendant to get the account regularized or to pay back the amount. The defendant however executed Confirmation of Balance and Security letters on 15.07.2013, 16.09.2014, 31.08.2015, 02.03.2016 and 26.09.2017 confirming the dues payable by the defendant to the applicant.

6. It is also the case of the applicant that despite repeated reminders and requests the defendant failed to make the repayment forcing the applicant to file this OA

seeking recovery of the amount due in the account with further interest and costs.

7. It is the further case of the applicant that the defendant remained absent and hence was called absent and set ex-parte on 21.03.2019.

8. The applicant had let in evidence through AW-1, who had sworn to a Proof Affidavit in terms of the pleading in the OA and also produced Exhibits A-1 to A-15 and got the same marked in evidence. Exhibits A-1, A-5, A-8 and A-10 were marked subject to proof.

9. Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant and considered the contentions as taken in the OA in the light of documentary evidence and proof affidavit.

10. The following issues arise for consideration in this matter: -

(i) Whether the applicant had succeeded in proving the OA claim as against the defendant?

(ii) What orders are to be passed?

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

11. The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant remained ex-parte. 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 OA 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.

12. In view of the fact that the subject loan is a business loan and the applicant has charged interest at contractual rates till the date of filing and further as the interest rates have come down the Tribunal is inclined to reject the interest with monthly rests and award simple interest at reduced rates.

13. In view of the afore mentioned discussions, the only conclusion this Tribunal can draw is that the applicant had clearly proved the disbursement of the loan, which the applicant is entitled to realize. Hence, TA is disposed off in the following manner: - (a) TA No.598 of 2023 stands allowed.

(b) Applicant is permitted to realize an aggregate amount of Rs.35,06,181/- with future and pendentelite interest @12% p.a., simple from the defendant, from the date of filing of the OA till realization, after deducting all the amounts received by them during the pendency of OA, and also by the other assets of the defendant.

(c) It is made clear that the defendant is personally liable for all such amounts due under the Loan Accounts.

(d) Applicant is permitted to realize cost of the proceedings and shall file cost memo within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order.

(e) The Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery Officer in terms of this final 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 PS, transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court, on this the 29th day of December, 2023) Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, CHENNAI