CANARA BANK vs M/S. TYCHE STONE WORKS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REP BY ITS PARTNERS on 29 May 2025

: - O R D E R - :

1. The Application was filed before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Bengaluru on 12.11.2016 Under Section 19 (1) of the Recovery of Debt And Bankruptcy Act, 1993 and numbered as OA No. 2079/2016, seeking for issuance of a Recovery Certificate for Rs. 76,99,718.53 (Rupees seventy-six lakh ninety-nine thousand seven hundred eighteen and fifty-three only). Subsequently, owing to bifurcation of jurisdiction vide Government of India Gazette Notification dated 30.01.2017, the Application (OA No. 2079/2016) was transferred from Debts Recovery Tribunal -I, Bangalore to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No. 1184/2017. The credit facility for Rs 50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lakh only) availed by the defendants and defaulted subsequently in gross violation of the terms and conditions stipulated in the loan agreement is the subject matter of the TA.

2. It is also stated that the facility is secured by hypothecation of movables.

3. The Applicant further contents that despite availing the credit facility by obliging to pay back the amount, the defendants failed in compliance of the same and all the efforts of the Applicant to make the defendants pay back the amount failed forcing the Applicant to file this Application.

4. Summons was taken out and as the defendants failed their Vakalath and Written statement with counterclaim, but they failed adduce any evidence and, in the proceedings, defendants were set exparte. The applicant was adduced their evidence through AW3, who filed proof affidavit, produced documents and got marked Ext.A3 to A19 list of which are annexed to this order.

5. Written statement was filed by Defendants alleging that the Application is utterly barred by limitation is not correct because the OA filed on 12.11.2016 and the loan was availed on 2015. The limitation period for recovering a loan secured by hypothecation depends on whether the claim is for defaulted installments or the entire balance. For defaulted installments, the suit must be filed within 3 years from the date of default. If the claim is for recovery of the entire amount after default, the limitation period is 12 years from the date of default. The TA claim is made within limitation and there is no capitalization of penal interest. However, the Defendants failed to substantiate their contentions either by way of any affidavit nor documentary evidence.

6. The Applicant evidence remain un-rebutted and hence proved. The documents produced by the Applicant are found to be admissible and are sufficient to prove the TA claim. Hence the Applicant is to be found entitled for the TA claim as the only issue as to the proof of TA claim is answered in favour of the applicant.

7. Since the TA claim is arrived at by calculating agreed rate of interest, penal interest/ default interest, which this Tribunal considers as on the higher side, pendent lite and future interest is awarded at fixed rate.

8. In view of the above i. TA 1184 OF 2017 stands allowed ii. Applicant is permitted to recover an amount of Rs.76,99,718.53 (Rupees seventy-six lakh ninety-nine thousand seven hundred eighteen and paisa fifty-three) with future and pendent lite interest @ 18.2%. (simple) from the date of filing of the TA till realization from the defendants after giving credit to all the amount recovered and received during the pendency of the TA

and allowed the same to be recovered by proceed against defendants and their assets. iii. A Recovery Certificate is to be drawn and issued to the recovery Officer to enable recovery of the as per the above terms. iv. Interim application pending, if any, stands disposed of in terms of this final order. v. Applicant is allowed to realize cost of the proceeding for which cost memo is to be filed in 7 days’ time from the date of receipt of the copy of the order.

9. 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 PY directly on the Computer, after its transcription, corrected and pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 29th day of May 2025)

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER

Applicant Witness:

AW1 –Sri. Sunil Kumar Rana, Manager, Union Bank of India Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

Exhibits are appended in this final order

Witness Examined for the Defendant:

-Nil – List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendant: -Nil -

Sd/- (T. RAJESH) PRESIDING OFFICER