BANK OF MAHARASHTRA vs M/S.MOTO SOLUTIONS (BLR) A PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM REP BY ITS PROP SRI.MADHUGIRI.J. on 29 May 2025

FINAL ORDER

1. The present Original Application in short OA has been filed under section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993 for seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate against the defendants for 2 TA/1355/2017

Rs.11,53,052/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs Fifty Three Thousand and Fifty Two only) with further interest thereon from the date of filing the Application till realization.

2. It is the case of the applicant that, the defendant as Proprietorship concern represented by its Proprietor availed Cash Credit facility of Rs.11,00,000/- on 09.10.2013, for the purpose of meeting its working capital requirements. It is also the case of the applicant that defendants have undertaken to repay the liability, subject to annual review or on Demand to pay with interest for the value received and further to pay the interest at such rate as revised by the bank from time to time.

3. It is also the case of the applicant that, in view of the above financed the amount, the defendants have executed necessary loan documents along with Demand Promissory Note, Composite Deed of Hypothecation.

4. It is further contended that, despite availing the credit facility, agreeing to service the loan account promptly and regularly, the defendants failed in complying the same, resulting in defaults in repayment and consequentially turning the loan accounts as NPA.

5. In the above circumstances, the applicant approached this 3 TA/1355/2017

Tribunal by filing this OA seeking issuance of Recovery Certificate for the amount due in the account.

6. Despite, service of summons on the defendant, failed to appear, resulting the defendant being set exparte on 28.01.2025.

7. The applicant let in evidence through AW-1, who filed Proof Affidavit reiterating the contentions taken in the OA and also produced Exhibits A1 to A10 and got the same marked in evidence.

8. 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.

9. 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 order are to be passed?

Both these issues are gone into and decided together.

10. The case put forth by the applicant in the Application remains unrebutted as defendant remained exparte. The evidence tendered by the applicant remains uncontroverted and undisputed. The evidences put forth by the applicant were found 4 TA/1355/2017

admissible and are sufficient to prove availment of credit facility as stated in the OA, creation of security interest as claimed by the applicant bank and the defaults committed in the account. The liability of the defendant and the claim of the amount due are also proved by the above documents. The claim of the applicant is well within the limitation.

11. Hence in view of the above finding which cover both the issues raised in this manner, this Tribunal is of the view that OA is liable to be allowed.

12. Taking into consideration the facts that the credit facilities are availed for business purpose the rate of interest is not altered. However, as the OA claim is arrived at by calculating interest at the agreed rate, this Tribunal in view of the OA can be allowed at @ 11.70% p.a. simple rate.

13. In the result, TA.No.1355/2017 stands allowed,

i) The applicant is allowed to recover an aggregate sum of Rs.11,53,052/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh Fifty Three Thousand and Fifty Two only) with further interest of 11.70% p.a.(simple) from the date of filing OA till the realization, after giving credit to all the 5 TA/1355/2017

amount recovered and received during the pendency of the OA and allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against the defendant personally and also allowed the same to be recovered by proceeding against their assets including hypothica. The schedule to the OA be the schedule to the recovery certificate.

ii) The applicant bank is allowed cost of the proceeding which applicant to file cost memo within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order.

iii) The Recovery Certificate to be drawn in terms of this order and transferred to Recovery for execution.

iv) Interim Application pending, if any, stands disposed of with 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 the Stenographer (PR), transcribed by her, corrected and signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court, this the 29th Day of May 2025].

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

6 TA/1355/2017

ANNEXURES WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK: AW-1: Sri. Nishit Chandra, Chief Manager of the applicant bank. Exhibits on the part of the Applicant: Annexure Particulars A1 Affidavit Of Evidence A2 List of Documents A3 Sanction letter dated 09.10.2013 A4 Request letter in respect of Cash Credit facility dated 09.10.2013 A5 Demand promissory note dated 09.10.2013 A6 Composite Deed of Hypothecation for all facilities dated 09.10.2013 executed by defendant A7 Declaration/Undertaking dated 09.10.2013 A8 Notice dated 02.04.2016 A9 Demand notice dated 02.05.2016 A10 Extract of the statement of accounts

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER