Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
M/S CORPORATION BANK vs SRI P B NAGDEEP on 18 January 2020
(20)
**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU**
Dated this the 18<sup>th</sup> day of January 2020
**:Present:
Shri K Ravindran Nair
Hon`ble Presiding Officer
In-charge-DRT-II**
**T.A.No.1940/2017
(O.A.No.1855/2016-DRT-I)**
**BETWEEN:**
**M/s. Corporation Bank,
Aruna Complex
No.66/1 & 2, 1<sup>st</sup> Floor, J C Road, Bengaluru- 560 002.
Karnataka.**
**Represented by its Asst. General Manager Sri. T. C. Aggarwal**
** ... APPLICANT**
**AND:**
**Sri. P. B. Nagdeep,
S/o. Late Sri. P. Brahmappa
Aged about 30 years**
**R/at: No.12, 4<sup>th</sup> Cross, Balaji Avenue Muneswara Layout Attur Layout, Yelahanka Bengaluru- 560 064.**
** .. DEFENDANT**
**Counsels on record/appeared for:**
**Applicant : Sri. V. B. Ravi Shankar
Defendant : Ex-parte**
**FINAL ORDERS**
The present Application came to be registered on 23.08.2016 in DRT-I Bengaluru numbered as OA 1855/2016.
2T.A.1940/2017 in
Thereafter on the point of jurisdiction transferred to DRT-II, Bengaluru, and renumbered as Transfer Application No.1940/2017 under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, seeking recovery of an amount of Rs.22,05,443/- (Rupees Twenty-Two Lakhs Five Thousand Four Hundred and Forty-Three only) from the Defendant together with interest and cost.
2. The case of the applicant bank is that defendant who is an Agriculturist had approached the applicant bank seeking Vehicle Loan to purchase a brand new Eicher VE 35.31K 4700MM BSIII goods vehicle. The applicant bank considered his request and sanctioned vehicle loan of Rs.22 lac vide sanction letter dated 18.02.2014. Defendant has executed necessary documents in favour of the applicant bank. After availing the loan, the defendant failed to regularize the loan account and also failed to pay the interest/installments, and he did not come forward to repay the balance outstanding. The applicant bank has produced the documents in favour of its 3T.A.1940/2017 in
case viz., loan application, sanction letter, promissory note, legal notice, legal notice, certified copy of account extract etc. The Applicant bank has issued legal notice dated 01.06.2016 to the defendant, for which the defendant has not taken any steps to clear the dues. Hence, the O.A was filed in DRT-I and now re-numbered as TA.1940/2017 upon transfer to DRT-II.
3. Further the defendant agreed to repay the above loan with variable rates of interest, as applicable from time to time as per the directions of the Head Office/Central Office of the Applicant Bank and penal interest in case of default and to keep the account regular by paying installments as and when due to the satisfaction of the Applicant Bank, as detailed in the OA by the Applicant Bank.
4. The defendant after utilizing the entire loan proceeds for the above said purpose have failed to make the repayments of the loan dues as agreed, not serviced the interest thereon as 4T.A.1940/2017 in
per the terms and conditions agreed by them and became chronic defaulters and hence, the recovery process is initiated against the defendant to recover the dues.
5. In the light of these factors, it is contended by the Applicant Bank that, Defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs.22,05,443/- (Rupees Twenty-Two Lakhs Five Thousand Four Hundred and Forty-Three only).
6. After filing the OA, summons was sent through RPAD and same was served on the Defendant returned with postal shara 'addressee left'. Thereafter summons were served through paper publications in two leading dailies against the Defendant. Even then, when defendant was called out, Defendant remained absent and hence placed ex parte.
7. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, its Asst. General Manager, Sri.Mahadev N Moger, has filed his affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW-1 and 5T.A.1940/2017 in
marked at Ex. A-1 and list of documents came to be marked as Ex.A-2 and 6 documents came to be marked as Ex.A-3 to Ex.A-8.
8. No evidence on behalf of the Defendant.
9. Arguments of Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff/applicant bank heard and perused the records of the case.
10. Following points arise for my consideration:
a) Whether Plaintiff/applicant bank proves its case as contended in the plaint/application?
b) What order?
11. For the following reasons, I answer the above referred points in the following manner:
**REASONS**
12. Sri. Mahadev N. Moger, Asst. General Manager of the applicant bank came to be examined as AW-1. His affidavit by way of evidence reiterates the facts pleaded in the plaint and her affidavit is also corroborated by the above referred Ex.A-3 to Ex.A-8 which clearly establish the case of the applicant bank to allow the present TA. Added to this, the defendant remained 6T.A.1940/2017 in
absent, hence it is to be construed that the defendant have admitted the entire case pleaded by the applicant bank as sought in the present TA.
13. Therefore, for these reasons, present TA is to be allowed with costs as sought by the applicant bank.
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.
**:O R D E R:**
Present TA stands allowed with costs.
Defendant is personally liable to pay Rs.22,05,443/- (Rupees Twenty-Two Lakhs Five Thousand Four Hundred and Forty-Three only) with interest at the rate of 12.05% P.A.,(including 2% penal interest) at compounded monthly rests, from the date of application till the date of final realization, as sought by the Applicant Bank in the TA.
The Applicant Bank is at liberty to proceed against the vehicle mentioned in Schedule A. If the sale proceeds are insufficient to adjust the Banks claim, Bank may proceed.
7T.A.1940/2017 in against the person and other properties of the Defendant as required under law and also as advised.
Applicant Bank shall file fresh Memo of calculation of TA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by Defendant duly taking into account the amount/s if any paid by the Defendant and/or amount realized by sale of assets, etc., during the intervening period after filing the TA, to enable the office to prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by the Defendant to the Applicant Bank.
Office is directed to issue Recovery Certificate.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, after its transcription and necessary corrections, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the **18<sup>th</sup> day of January, 2020**)
**(K. Ravindran Nair)** **Presiding Officer** **I/C -DRT II, Bengaluru**
8T.A.1940/2017 in O.A.No.1855/2016**ANNEXURES:****LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT-BANK:**
AW.1 – Sri. Mahadev N. Moger Asst. General Manager of the Applicant bank **LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT BANK:**
Ex.A1 : Affidavit of AW.1 Ex.A2 : List of documents Exs.A3 – A.8 : 6 documents
**LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT :**
- NIL -
**LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT:**
-NIL-
**(K Ravindran Nair) Presiding Officer I/c-DRT-II, Bengaluru**
\*SS\*