STATE BANK OF INDIA vs Mr M Felix on 31 January 2019

ORDER

1. This application is filed by the applicant bank under Section 19(1) of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993) against the defendant for recovery of a sum of Rs.45,38,241.70p due as on 31.7.2018 together with interest at 9% per annum with monthly rests from the date of filing of the application till the date of realization in full, sale of the schedule mentioned property, along with costs of this application.

2. Brief facts of Application are as follows: 2.1 The applicant bank submits that the defendant approached the applicant bank for a Housing

Loan to the tune of Rs.30,65,000/- and executed a Arrangement Letter dated 8.8.2012. Accordingly, the applicant bank sanctioned the aforesaid Housing Loan and the defendant executed loan and security documents such as Memorandum of Loan Agreement for Home Loan, Agreement to Mortgage, etc. on 8.8.2012 and Memorandum of Deposit dated 6.6.2013. 2.2 It is submitted that the defendant has undertaken to repay the loan amount together with interest, as per the terms and conditions of the Arrangement Letter dated 8.8.2012. It is stated that subsequent to the disbursement of the loan, the defendant did not operate the accounts, as per the terms and conditions. 2.3 Despite repeated demands and reminders, the defendants did not come forward to regularize the account, consequently, the account of the defendant was declared as NPA. Thereafter, the applicant bank initiated under SARFAESI Act by issuing demand notice and possession notice, which evoked no response from the defendant. Hence, the present OA.

3. The defendant remained exparte.

4. Point for consideration: Whether the applicant bank is entitled for the amount claimed in the application from the defendant? If so, at what rate of interest?

5. Point Whether the applicant bank is entitled for the amount claimed in the application from the defendant? If so, at what rate of interest? 5.1 Toprove its claim, the applicant bank filed proof affidavit through its Deputy Manager along with 13 documents, which are marked as Ex.A1 to A13. The proof affidavit of the applicant bank remain unchallenged. I have carefully perused the material placed before the Tribunal, coupled with the proof affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant bank and I am satisfied that the applicant bank has successfully proved the OA claim against the defendant. Hence, it is held that the applicant bank is entitled for a Recovery Certificate for a sum of Rs.45,38,241.70p along with future interest at 9% per annum (simple) from the date of the application till the date of realization in full.

Point is answered accordingly.

6. Therefore, for the reasons stated as above, it is held that the applicant bank is entitled for a Recovery Certificate against the defendant for a sum of Rs.45,38,241.70p along with future interest at 9% per annum (simple) from the date of application till the date of realization in full, for sale of the schedule mentioned property,along with costs.

7. In the result, application is allowed as under:

(a) The applicant bank is entitled to recover a sum Rs.45,38,241.70p along with future interest at 9% per annum (simple) from the date of the application till the date of realization in full, from the defendant.

(b) It is further ordered that in case of default of payment by the defendant, the applicant bank is entitled to sell the schedule mentioned property and adjust the sale proceeds towards the amount due.

(c) If the sale proceeds are not found sufficient to cover the amount due and payable to the applicant bank, the defendant is personally liable for all such amounts due.

(d) The applicant bank is entitled for costs of this application.

8. The applicant bank is directed to file costs memo within two weeks of the receipt of this order.

9. Issue recovery certificate in favour of the applicant bank in terms of this final order.

10. Communicate a copy of the order to the parties concerned in terms of Rule 16 read with Rule 2(c) of DRT (Procedure)Rules, 1993. (Dictated to stenographer (SN), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this 31st day of January, 2019) Sd/- (N.V.BADARINATH)

PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-I, CHENNAI