Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
STATE BANK OF INDIA vs R Anitha on 31 January 2019
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERYTRIBUNAL –I ATCHENNAI
Dated this 31st Day of January,2019
Present: SHRI N.V.BADARINATH
PRESIDING OFFICER
OA 303/2018
State Bank of India
Rep. by its Authorised Officer,
RACPC, Chennai,
No.16, Whannels Road,
Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
…Applicant Bank
Vs.
R. Anitha,
Old No.64, New No.10,
S.P.S.2nd Street,
Royapettah,
Chennai 600 014.
….Defendant
Counsel for the Applicant Bank
: Ms. K. Parameshwari and C. Srikanth
Defendant remained 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. 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.29,88,574/- due as on 16.7.2018 together with interest at 11.15% 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 HNI Ashok Nagar Branch of the applicant bank on 5.2.2016 seeking a Housing Loan of Rs.33,48,000/- and SBI Suraksha Loan of Rs.2,33,275/- to purchase a flat, morefully described in the schedule of the OA. 2.2 It is submitted that the applicant bank considered the said request of the defendant and sanctioned a sum of Rs.33,48,000/- towards Housing Loan and a sum of Rs.2,33,275/- towards SBI Suraksha Loan on 29.3.2016 and the defendant executed necessary loan and security documents such as Memorandum of Loan Agreement for Home Loan, etc., on 29.3.2016 and agreed to repay the principal with interest at 9.5% p.a. in 299 EMIs of Rs.29,276/- pm commencing from April, 2016. The defendant also executed a Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds on 20.4.2017 and deposited the sale deed of her property in order to secure the aforesaid credit facilities. 2.3 It is submitted that in spite of the undertaking to repay the dues, the defendant did not do so and progressively became a defaulter. The defendant was evasive in her replies to regularize the account. Therefore, the loan account was classified as NPA on 10.12.2017. Thereafter, the applicant initiated measures under SARFAESI Act by issuing Section 13(2) and 13(4) notices, on 14.12.2017 and 6.4.2018 respectively, which evoked no response from the defendants. Thus, the defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs.28,29,607/- under Housing Loan and a sum of Rs.1,58,967/- under SBI Suraksha Loan totalling to a sum of Rs.29,88,574/- as on 16.7.2018. 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 To prove its claim, the applicant bank filed proof affidavit through its Authorised Officer along with 10 documents, which are marked as Ex.A1 to A10. 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.29,88,574/-p 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.29,88,574/- 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.29,88,574/- 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