VIJAYA BANK vs SURESH & ANR (BLR) on 2 March 2019

✓

**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA

AT BENGALURU**

Dated this the 2^nd day of March 2019

**Present: Shri K Ravindran Nair

Hon'ble Presiding Officer

In-charge-DRT-II**

**T.A.NO. 2271 / 2017

(OA.2216/2015-DRT-I)**

**BETWEEN**

**VIJAYA BANK,**

Mysuru Road Branch,

No.152, 2^nd and 3^rd Main Road, 7^th Cross, Chamarajpet, Bengaluru -560 018, **Represented by its Chief Manager- Sri. Prasanna Ram.**

..... **APPLICANT**

**AND**

**1) SRI. SURESH,**

S/o. Venkataraju,

Aged about 36 years,

R/at No.6,

Bank of Baroda Colony,

24^th Main, 7^th Phase, J.P. Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 078.

**2) MR. C.S. KODANDARAMARAJU,**

S/o. Y. Sheshmaraju,

Aged about 48 years,

R/at No.30/42, 'Hari Nivas',

17^th Cross, 18^th Main, Padmanabha Nagar, Bengaluru – 560 070.

..... **DEFENDANTS**

**Counsels on record/appeared for:**

Applicant : Sri. Ravishankar.

Defendants No.1 & 2 : *Ex parte*.

2TA.2271/2017

IN OA.2216/2015-DRT-I**FINAL ORDER**

The present Transfer Application is filed by the Applicant Bank under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks & Financial Institutions Act, 1993, seeking recovery of an amount of Rs.99,84,871/- from the Defendants with interest and cost.

2. The case of the applicant bank that Defendants had approached the applicant bank for financial assistance. The applicant bank considered his requests and sanctioned CCH Loan of Rs.90,00,000/- vide Sanction Letter dated 28.09.2013. The Defendants have executed requisite necessary documents in favour of the applicant bank for the above said loans. The defendants have agreed to repay the said loan as per the terms and conditions of the applicant bank. After availing the loan, the defendants failed to regularize the loan accounts and also failed to pay the installments and did not come forward to repay the balance outstanding. Hence, the present TA. The applicant bank has produced the documents in favour of its case viz., Loan Application, Sanction of CCH Loan, Registered Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds, On Demand 3TA.2271/2017

Promissory Note, Letter of Repayment, Agreement for Demand Cash, Letter of Guarantee, and Certified Accounts Extract etc.,

3. Further the Defendants agreed to repay the above loans with variable rate 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 keep the account regular by paying installments as and when due to the satisfaction of the Applicant Bank, as detailed in the TA by the Applicant Bank.

4. The Defendants after utilizing all the entire loan proceeds for the above said purposes have failed to make the repayments of the loan dues as agreed and he has not serviced the interest thereon as per the terms and conditions agreed by Defendants. The Defendants have become chronic defaulter in the loan accounts and not taken any steps to clear the dues and hence the recovery process is initiated to recover the dues.

4TA.2271/2017

5. In the light of these factors, it is contended by the Applicant Bank that, Defendants are liable to pay a total sum of Rs.99,84,871/-.

6. After filing the TA, summon was sent and served on the Defendants through RPAD, when Defendants were called out, defendants remained absent and placed *ex-parte*.

7. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, its Asst. General Manager has filed his affidavit by way of evidence and same was considered as evidence of AW-1 and marked at Ex. A-1 and list of documents came to be marked as Ex.A-2 and 9 documents came to be marked as Ex.A-3 to Ex.A-11.

8. No evidence on behalf of the Defendants.

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:

1. 1) Whether Plaintiff/applicant bank proves its case as contended in the plaint/application?

2. 2) What order?

5TA.2271/2017

11. For the following reasons, I answer the above referred points in the following manner:

REASONS

12. The 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 his affidavit is also corroborated by the above referred Ex.A-3 to Ex.A-11, which clearly establish the case of the applicant bank to allow the present TA. Added to this, the Defendants has remained absent and hence it is to construed that he has admitted the entire case pleaded by the applicant bank as sought in the present TA.

13. Consequently, Interim order of temporary injunction of schedule properties in IA. No.4605/2015 passed on 21.12.2015 are made absolute.

14. Therefore, for these reasons, present TA is to be allowed with costs as sought by the applicant bank.