M/s Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Pvt Ltd vs M/s Mahalakshmi Enterprises Rep by its Prop Mr.T.S.Sathyanarayana 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**

**Incharge-DRT-II**

**T.A.NO.1139/2017**

**(O.A.No.1646/2014-DRT-I)**

**BETWEEN:**

**Pegasus Assets Reconstruction Private Ltd.,**

At 507, Dalamal House, Nariman Point,

Mumbai-400 021 and corporate office

At 55-56, 5^th Floor, Free Press House Nariman Point Mumbai-400 021

**Represented by its authorized signatory**

Nagesh Babu

S/o Gopal Reddy

..... **APPLICANT**

**AND:**

1. 1) M/s Mahalakshmi Enterprises

Rep.by its Proprietor

Mr.T.S.Sathyanarayana

2. 2) Mr.T.S.Sathyanarayana

Since deceased rep.by Legal heirs

(a). Master S.Chethan Ram

3. (3) Mrs.B.V.Lalitha

**All are r/at:** No.2153, 2^nd Cross 17^th Main Road, Opp: KPTCL Office HAL 2^nd Stage, Indiranagar Bengaluru-560038, Karnataka

4. 4) Mr.T.R.Subramanyam

Since deceased rep.by Legal heirs

(a). Smt.S.Usha

W/o Mr.Shivakumar

R/at: No.003, Shanbagh Pariwar

Apartments, Opp: Vijaya Bank Layout

Arekere, Bannerghatta Road

Bengaluru-560076

DEFENDANTS

**Counsels on record/appeared for:**

Applicant : Sri Narayana Shenoy

D1,D2(a),D3,D4(a): Ex parte

**FINAL ORDERS**

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.3,36,21,674/- from the Defendants with interest and cost.

2. The case of the applicant bank that 1^st defendant is a proprietorship concern and it is represented by defendant No.2 had approached the applicant bank for financial assistance. The applicant bank considered their request and sanctioned cash credit facility of Rs.,230 lakhs and medium term loan of Rs.64 lakhs vide sanction letter dated 06.01.2010. Defendants have executed necessary and requisite loan related documents in favour of the applicant bank. After availing the loans, the defendants failed to regularize the loan accounts and also failed to pay the

installments. Defendant 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 applications, sanction letter, declaration for creation of equitable mortgage, guarantee deed, memorandum of deposit of title deeds, undertaking and certified copies of account extracts 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 they have not serviced the interest thereon as per the terms and conditions agreed by the defendants and have become chronic defaulters and the Applicant bank has issued legal

notice dated 17.05.2013 to the defendants for which the defendants have not taken any steps to clear the dues and hence the recovery process is initiated to recover the dues.

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. 3,36,21,674/- .

6. After filing the TA, summons were sent and served on the defendants through RPAD, and when defendants were called out, defendant No.2 & 4 were reported to be dead and their LRs were brought on record as defendant No.2(a) and defendant No.4(a), defendants 1, 3, defendant No.2(a) and defendant No.4(a) remained absent and hence, placed all defendants ex-parte.

7. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, its Authorized signatory 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 23 documents came to be marked as Ex.A-3 to Ex.A-25.

1. 8. No evidence on behalf of the Defendants.

2. 9. Arguments of Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff/applicant bank heard and perused the records of the case.

3. 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?

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

**REASONS**

12. The Authorized signatory 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-25 which clearly establish the case of the applicant bank to allow the present TA. Added to this, defendants have remained absent and hence it is to be construed that they 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.