Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
STATE BANK OF MYSORE vs VENKATESH & ORS on 2 March 2019
**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU**
Dated this the 2<sup>nd</sup> day of March, 2019
**Present: Shri K Ravindran Nair
Hon`ble Presiding Officer
Incharge-DRT-II**
**T.A.No.1671/2017**
**(O.A.No.1535/2014-DRT-I)**
**BETWEEN:**
**State Bank of India**
Channarayapatna Branch
Channarayapatna
Bengaluru-Mangalore Road
Hassan District
**Represented by its Branch Manager**
Sri.Raghavendra Rao
**APPLICANT**
**AND:**
1. 1) Sri Venkatesh
S/o Late Sombegowda
2. 2) Gayathri
D/o Late Sombegowda
3. 3) Sujatha
D/o Late Sombegowda
4. 4) Sri Suresh
S/o Late Sombegowda
5. 5) Geetha
D/o Late Sombegowda
**All are r/at: Thenkanahally Village
Jambur Post, Nuggehally Hobli,
Channarayapatna, Hassan District
Karnataka**
**DEFENDANTS**
**Counsel on record/appeared for:**
Applicant : Sri T.S.Mahabaleshwara
Defendants-1 & 4 : Ex parte
Defendants 2,3 & 5: Sri A.S.Nanjundappa (WS not filed)
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.10,55,414/- from the Defendants with interest and cost.
2. The case of the applicant bank that late Sombegowda father of defendant No.1 had approached the applicant bank for financial assistance. The applicant bank considered his request and sanctioned ATL of Rs.4,96,000/- on 26.07.2006 and under agricultural debt relief scheme in 2008 further late Sombegowda availed Rs.1,52,279/- on 21.07.2008. Defendants have executed the necessary loan related documents in favour of the applicant bank. After availing the loan, the Defendants failed to regularize the loan account and also failed to pay the installments. Defendants 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 letters, agreement of hypothecation, registered mortgage deed, quotation, RC books 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. The Applicant bank has issued legal notice dated 05.03.2010 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.10,55,414/-.
6. After filing the TA, summons were sent and served on the defendants through RPAD, and when defendants were called out, defendants 2, 3 & 5 appeared through their advocate but in spite of sufficient opportunities, written statement has not been filed and defendants 1 & 4 remained absent, hence placed ex parte.
7. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, its Chief 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 14 documents came to be marked as Ex.A-3 to Ex.A-16.
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?
11. For the following reasons, I answer the above referred points in the following manner:
REASONS
12. The Chief 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-16 which clearly establish the case of the applicant bank to allow the present TA. Added to this, the defendants 1 & 4 have remained absent and conduct of defendants 2, 3 and 5 having not filed written statement in spite of sufficient opportunities hence it is to 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.
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.
**:ORDER:**
Present TA stands allowed as prayed for with costs.
Defendants shall jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.10,55,414/- i.e., (i) Rs.8,05,071/- towards ATL loan interest at the rate of 15.50% p.a and (ii) Rs.2,50,343/- with interest at the rate of 13.75% p.a, both with compounded half yearly rests, from the date of application till the date of realization, as sought by the Applicant Bank in the TA.
In the event of failure of Defendants to pay the said TA amount, the applicant bank is at liberty to sell the hypothecated movable assets as described in the Schedule-A and mortgaged immovable properties as described in the Schedule-B of the main petition according to the Law as sought by the applicant bank in the TA.
In spite of sale of the property mentioned in the Schedule/s, if the TA amount is not fully realized, then the Applicant Bank is at liberty to proceed against the person and other properties of the Defendants 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 Defendants duly taking into account the amount/s if any paid by the Defendants 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 Defendants to the Applicant Bank.
Office is directed to issue Recovery Certificate.
(Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by her and after necessary corrections, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this <sup>2<sup>nd</sup></sup> day of March, 2019)
K. Ravindran Nair Presiding Officer I/C - DRT II, Bengaluru
**:ANNEXURES:**
**LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT-BANK:**
AW.1 – Sri Narasimha Murthy Chief Manager of 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.16 : 14 documents
**LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANTS :**
- NIL -
**LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANTS:**
-NIL-
K Ravindran Nair Presiding Officer I/c-DRT-II, Bengaluru
Cha ..