Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
CANARA BANK vs LAKKE GOWDA on 31 August 2019
**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL II, KARNATAKA
AT BENGALURU**
Dated this the 31<sup>st</sup> day of August, 2019
**Present: Shri K Ravindran Nair
Hon`ble Presiding Officer
Incharge-DRT-II**
**T.A.No.1645/2017**
**(O.A.NO.164/2016-DRT-I)**
**BETWEEN:**
**Canara Bank**
Heragu Branch, Dudda Hobli
Hassan Taluk & District-573 118
**Represented by its Manager**
**Mr.N.R.Nagaraja**
S/o N.Ramanna
** ...APPLICANT**
**AND:**
**1) Mr.Lakke Gowda**
S/o Javaregowda
**2) Mr.Shankara**
S/o Lakke Gowda
**3) Ms.Roopa**
D/o Lakke Gowda
**4) Ms.Rekha**
D/o Lakke Gowda
**All are r/at: Attavara Village**
Dudda Hobli, Hassan Taluk &
District-573 118
** ....DEFENDANTS**
**Counsels on record/appeared for:**
**Applicant : Sri Jai M.Patil**
**D1 to 4 : Ex-parte**
**FINAL ORDERS**
The present Application came to be registered on 04.01.2016 on the basis of jurisdictional transfer and
renumbered as Transfer Application No.1645/2017 under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, seeking recovery of an amount of Rs.12,21,265/- (Rupees twelve lakh twenty-one thousand two hundred and sixty-five only) from the Defendants together with interest and cost.
2. The case of the applicant bank is that defendants had approached the applicant bank for financial assistance in order to purchase tractor, trailer and other implements. The applicant bank considered their request and sanctioned farm machinery loan of Rs.4,50,000/- vide sanction memorandum dated 12.10.2006. Defendants have executed necessary and requisite 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, they did not come forward to repay the balance outstanding. Hence, the O.A was filed before DRT-I and the OA was transferred on the point of jurisdiction and re-numbered as T.A.No.1645/2017. The applicant bank has produced the documents in favour of its case viz., loan application, sanction memorandum, memorandum of
agreement, RC book, simple mortgage deed, revival letters, legal notice , certified copy of account extract etc.
3. Further the defendants 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 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 defendants after utilizing the entire loan proceeds for the above said purpose have failed to make the repayments of the loan dues as agreed, they have not serviced the interest thereon as per the terms and conditions agreed by them, became chronic defaulters 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.12,21,265/- (Rupees twelve lakh twenty-one thousand two hundred and sixty-five only) .
6. After filing the OA, summons were sent through RPAD same were served on defendants 1 and 2, summons of defendants 3 and 4 were returned with postal shara as 'no such person' and 'not in village' and thereafter paper publications were made, even then defendants remained absent and hence, they were placed ex parte.
7. To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, its Manager, Mr. Suresh T, S/o Thimme Gowda, 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 10 documents came to be marked as Ex.A-3 to Ex.A-12.
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:
5T.A.1645/2017 in O.A.No.164/2016**REASONS**
12. Mr. Suresh.T S/o Thimme Gowda, 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-12 which clearly establish the case of the applicant bank to allow the present TA. Added to this, defendants 1 to 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. Consequently, Interim order of temporary injunction of schedule 'A' and 'B' properties in IA Nos.123/2016 and 124/2016 passed on 25.01.2016 is made absolute.
14. 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 as prayed for with costs. Consequently, Interim order of temporary injunction of schedule 'A' and 'B' properties in IA Nos.123/2016 and 124/2016 passed on 25.01.2016 is made absolute.
Defendants shall be jointly and severally are liable to pay Rs.12,21,265/- (Rupees twelve lakh twenty-one thousand two hundred and sixty-five only) including current and future interest, 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 and mortgaged movable and immovable properties as described in the Schedule-A and B 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 **31<sup>st</sup> day of August, 2019**)
**(K. Ravindran Nair)** **Presiding Officer** **I/C - DRT II, Bengaluru**
**ANNEXURES:**
**LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT-BANK:**
AW.1 - Mr. Suresh T, S/o Thimme Gowda 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.12 : 10 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/
This image is a scan of a blank white piece of paper. It contains several small, dark specks which appear to be scanning artifacts or dust particles. There is no text, handwriting, or printed content on the page.