Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
HDFC BANK vs UMASANKARA REDDY on 24 August 2019
**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU**
Dated this the 24<sup>th</sup> day of August, 2019
**Present: Shri K Ravindran Nair
Hon`ble Presiding Officer
Incharge-DRT-II**
**T.A.No.1530/2017
(O.A.NO.2147/2016-DRT-II)**
**BETWEEN:**
**HDFC Bank Ltd.,**
Branch office at Mythri Arcade
Kantharaje Urs Road
1<sup>st</sup> Main, Saraswathipuram
Mysore-570 009
**Represented by its Dy.Manager & PA Holder Mr.Raju Basava S/o Sri Linge Gowda**
** ...APPLICANT**
**AND:**
- **1) Sri Umasankara Reddy**
S/o Sri Ramachandra Reddy
- **2) Sri E.Ramachandra Reddy**
S/o Sri Peddasanjivappa
- **3) Smt.Thimmakka**
W/o Sri Ramachandra Reddy
**Defendants 1 to 3 are r/at:**
No.3/49, Untakallu
Untakallu Blaakulu-1, 5
Bommanahal, Mandal
Ananthapur-515 872
- **4) Sri Madhusudhana Reddy**
S/o Sri Dattathreya Reddy
R/at: Joladarasi Post
Bellary Taluk & District-583 101
** ....DEFENDANTS**
2T.A.1530/2017 in O.A.No.2147/2016**Counsels on record/appeared for:**
<table><tbody><tr><td><b>Applicant</b></td><td><b>: SA Associates</b></td></tr><tr><td><b>Defendants 1 & 2</b></td><td><b>: Sri E.Devaraja (WS not filed)</b></td></tr><tr><td><b>Defendants 3 & 4</b></td><td><b>: Ex-parte</b></td></tr></tbody></table>
**FINAL ORDERS**
The present Application came to be registered on 18.11.2016 on the basis of jurisdictional transfer and renumbered as Transfer Application No.1530/2017 under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks & Financial Institutions Act, 1993, seeking recovery of an amount of Rs.16,32,445.97 (Rupees sixteen lakh thirty-two thousand four hundred forty-five and paise ninety-seven only) from the Defendants together with interest and cost.
2. The case of the applicant bank is that defendants 1 to 3 had approached the applicant bank for financial assistance along with defendant No.4 as guarantor. The applicant bank considered their request and sanctioned Retail Agri Cash Credit of Rs.10,00,000/- and term loan of Rs.5,00,000/- vide sanction letter dated 26.02.2013. Defendants have executed necessary and requisite loan related documents in favour of the applicant bank. After availing the loans, defendants have
failed to regularize the loan accounts and also failed to pay the installments, they did not come forward to repay the balance outstanding, hence, the present TA against them is filed. The applicant bank has produced the documents in favour of its case viz., loan applications, sanction letters, assessment report, agreement of overdraft/cash credit cum guarantee cum hypothecation, agreement for term loan, DP note, mortgage deed and certified copies of account extracts etc.
3. Further defendants agreed to repay the above loans 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 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. Defendants after utilizing the entire loan proceeds for the above said purpose 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 them and
have become chronic defaulter and hence, the recovery process is initiated against the defendants 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 sum of Rs.16,32,445.97 (Rupees sixteen lakh thirty-two thousand four hundred forty-five and paise ninety-seven only) .
6. After filing the TA, summons were sent and served on the defendants 1 to 3 through RPAD and through paper publication to defendant No.4 and when defendants were called out, defendants 1 and 2 appeared through their advocate but have not filed their written statement and defendants 3 and 4 were remained absent and hence they were placed ex parte.
7. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, its Deputy Manager, Mr. Fayaz Ahmed M.A, S/o Abdul Rahim Sab, 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:
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. Mr. Fayaz Ahmed M.A, S/o Abdul Rahim Sab, Dy. 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 No.1 and 2 in spite of entering appearance through their advocate did not chose to file their written statement and also not led any evidence to contest the matter and rebut the claim of the applicant bank. Whereas in this case defendant No.3 and 4 remained absent, hence it is to be
construed that the defendants 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 be jointly and severally are liable to pay Rs.16,32,445.97 (Rupees sixteen lakh thirty-two thousand four hundred forty-five and paise ninety-seven only) with interest at 18% p.a, 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 mortgaged immovable properties as described in the Schedule-A to E of the main petition in accordance with law, as sought by the applicant bank in the TA.
In spite of sale of the properties 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 Stenographer, after its transcription and necessary corrections, signed and pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the **24<sup>th</sup> day of August, 2019**)
**(K. Ravindran Nair)** **Presiding Officer** **I/C - DRT II, Bengaluru**
8T.A.1530/2017 in O.A.No.2147/2016**ANNEXURES:****LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT-BANK:**
AW.1 – Mr. Fayaz Ahmed M.A, S/o Abdul Rahim Sab Deputy 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**
c/